|
||||||||||
|
“Creating Change,” Corrupting Children: the ‘Gay’ Task Force’s Evil AgendaDecember 6th, 2006AN Americans For Truth SPECIAL REPORT How Does a Teenager Get Started in Homosexual “Sex Work”? Just ask the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force… It’s about time that Christian Americans learn to distinguish between the man or woman struggling with homosexual temptations–to whom we should extend a loving hand and God’s grace to help them overcome–and a “gay” activist movement bent on destroying all sexual and gender norms in the culture. Last month, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force held its 2006 Creating Change conference at the Westin Crown Hotel in Kansas City, Missouri. Americans For Truth sent reporters to the Nov. 10-12 event–and they witnessed the farthest thing from heartland values that you can imagine. Our representatives were forced to go undercover because the Task Force bans conservative critics from its conferences. (Years ago, I was kicked out of a Task Force conference while attending a workshop on “public sex,” led by a panelist who runs a pornographic “cruising” site for men looking for anonymous sex with other men. No joke.) Is it any wonder that Task Force leaders are not “proud” of their radical agenda but seek instead to hide it from the public? And yet they have the audacity to compare their movement to Martin Luther King’s. As the leftist arm of the homosexual movement, the Task Force’s annual “Creating Change” conference — now in its 19th year — tells us where they want to take America. “Sex work” for teenagers? Don’t judge it as wrong. Prostitution? Legalize it but don’t tax it. Partnering with sexual sadists, pornographers and “fetishists”? Hey, they have their “rights,” too. The new rallying cry for the “gay” Left is “Sexual Freedom.” This is to the sloganeering homosexual militant what “people’s democracy” was (is) to the Communist cadre: Orwellian Newspeak for an extreme agenda that threatens children, undermines natural families, and ultimately helps destroy societies. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s crusade for sexual anarchy — which we will lay out in future articles — is the logical result of a movement that is constantly discovering new rights based on sexual and gender aberrations. Of course, the Task Force cannot say “No” to the sadomasochists and the prostitution advocates, etc.: if rights can be based on homosexual behavior — a sin so grievous that it was an unspoken taboo not too long ago — why stop at these other sex/gender “orientations”? Meanwhile, the Task Force’s director, Matt Foreman, regularly blasts pro-family Christians and groups like American For Truth as “extremists” and “homophobes.” Reality check: there is nothing more extreme than the Gay Task Force’s agenda of casting aside all laws proscribing immoral and unhealthy sexual conduct. While many homosexuals take issue with this or that aspect of the Task Force’s “loony left” agenda, Americans need to recognize that, collectively, the organized homosexual activist movement — those pushing to change our laws and make homosexuality and transsexuality easy for youth to embrace — constitutes one of the greatest evils facing our culture today. Now, I hear some of you objecting that the Task Force conference does not represent the “gay mainstream.” True, but the NGLTF’s other agenda of domesticated, “monogamous” homosexuality is nearly as extreme as what’s described below because it presents a “good” side to perversion — that is, sin — for young people to emulate. Regularizing sin (deviance) or repackaging it to appear more like normal heterosexual relationships does not make it right.
The likelihood that you don’t even want to think about answering that question bespeaks the evilness of organized homosexuality and the illicit nature of all “gay” sex. Supporting “civil unions” as a compromise is merely a capitulation to an agenda that seeks to enshrine wrong and sometimes deadly behavior as a “good” for society. Tear off the veneer of “gay” propaganda and underneath you will see that this issue has little to do with “equality” or “civil rights” and everything to do with a revolutionary assault on nature and a time-tested Judeo-Christian morality that has served Western civilization well. So why are we losing to this extreme movement? One reason is that the Task Force’s agenda is so perverse that most Americans cannot fathom it, while others simply don’t want to face the truth that committed activists are actually mobilizing around such deviance. Still others, their minds softened by the outreach of “gay” friends and family, have taken a “live and let live” approach even though in their gut they recognize the danger of normalizing things like “gay adoption,” “gay marriage” and “GLBT [gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered] youth.” So the “gays” — organized, wealthy and single-minded — win incrementally because “good people do nothing.” So what should we do? In my view there are three options:
We at Americans For Truth hope that you will join us in pursuing Option Three. God bless. — Peter LaBarbera —————————— Creating Change, Corrupting Children: The ‘Gay’ Task Force’s Evil Agenda By Americans For Truth staffers At the Creating Change conference (Nov 8-12, 2006), organized by the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, at least three teenagers (some still in high school) listened from the front row while a panel discussed “sex work” — prostitution, stripping, and pornography films — and sex worker “rights.” According the NLGTF’s website, Creating Change is the largest GLBT organizing conference. Over 2,000 homosexual activists were reportedly in attendance in Kansas City. The Task Force scheduled a panel discussion for Saturday (Nov 11) entitled “What’s $ Got to Do With It?: Sex Work, Economics, and Class.” The description of this session in the conference program states:
To be clear, the primary topic under consideration was prostitution. The program continues:
There were 77 seats available in the meeting room, very few empty, with an additional 8 or 10 people standing. In the front row, directly in front of the panel, sat teenage students from Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth (“BAGLY” — “a youth-led, adult-supported social support organization”). Four adults formed the panel: Darby Hickey, Carol Queen, Gennifer Hirano, and Tyrone Hanley.
Carol Queen is a world-renowned pervert (and proud of it), board member of Woodhull Foundation and creator of “Masturbate-a-thon.” You can read her review of Creating Change on her blog, “Chronicles of Sex Positive Culture” — including her summary of Thursday’s all day “Sexual Freedom Institute.” Gennifer Hirano is also known as “AsianPrincess” — “an Asian cowgirl in pink braids, bikini top, and thong who often sings ‘Coal Miner’s Daughter’ while giving an Asian man a lap dance” according to an article by Karen Eng. She is affiliated with SWOP (Sex Workers Outreach Project), and describes herself as a “Queer Bitch Whore Revolutionary.” An interview published in Asian Week reveals that Ms. Hirano performed at Crazy Horse, a full nude club in San Francisco’s SOMA district — while she was a grade school teacher in San Mateo (she resigned June 30, 2006). Tyrone Hanley of HIPS (Helping Individual Prostitutes Survive) also serves as president of Youth Alliance DC. So what did these four GLBT role models have to say to the audience — and more importantly, to teenagers — about “sex work”? NGLTF’s emerging policy position on prostitution
Darby Hickey said that “sex exchange is a right” and “a tool for survival.” Tyrone Hanley said that in DC, about 40% of sex workers are women, 40% are trans, and 20% are men. Of the trans prostitutes, nearly all are black or “of color” men who “lack access to the resources to achieve their transition goals” and who are excluded from legitimate employment, even among homosexual professionals and business owners who occupy “a position of power” in DC. “How do you get started?” The panelists did not suggest deterring the youth from pursuing sex work or encouraging the youth to think about a college education. They suggested listening, remaining non-judgmental, and perhaps discussing safety, “but not to the extent that he feels stigmatized.” “Jesus and all that horrible stuff” Carol Queen agreed that to offer services to prostitutes or the homeless while requiring Bible study or prayer is “coercive.” She suggested “creating alternative space without the Christian thing.” “White supremacy” Indeed. Beyond Marriage, Beyond Parents, Beyond BeliefDecember 6th, 2006The New York Times article linked below details arrangements made between 10 homosexual men and various sets of lesbian women to produce children without regard for God’s design for marriage and family: “People are in many cases redesigning ‘family.'” The writer aptly calls it “a kind of fatherhood that would seem to curtail both its joys and responsibilities.” The unrelenting focus on self-self-self is striking. “R.” is a white homosexual man who, with the help of a turkey baster, created a daughter with “M.” “M.” is a black lesbian woman who was in a relationship with a white woman and desired a biracial child.
In other words, little consideration was given to the needs of a child, but only to what was in it for him. The white woman was later impregnated by a homosexual black man to produce biracial twins. When the women split up, they were awarded joint custody. The black woman has a new lesbian partner and the white woman is now living with a man and has born a fourth child. “R.” is building a relationship with his daughter but admits that “She probably didn’t know exactly who I was.” When asked if there was any downside to fathering in this way, another homosexual sperm donor, Guy, answered “yes, missing the kids.” Revealing, isn’t it, that he thought only of the downside for himself? Mark, a homosexual man, fathered two children with Jean and Candi, a lesbian couple.
Is that all it takes to be “like any good father”? I don’t think so… David, a homosexual man, is honest enough to admit “I’m far too selfish a person.” He has fathered two children (the old fashioned way) with Vicky, who is in a lesbian relationship with P.J. Despite a close relationship with the women and children, when the elder child was diagnosed with neuroblastoma, a deadly cancer, and endured difficult surgery, grueling stem cell transplant, and radiation, well, “cancer was not something the family had planned on.” David remained focused on himself:
Can you even imagine??? And what dreams does David have for his sons?
Perhaps Alan Keyes characterized the proud “gay” movement well as “selfish hedonism,” despite all the flack he took from the liberal media. This is narcissism, appalling selfish disregard for the children involved, and a focus only on the unmet desires of the homosexual adults. Please read this article and remember it when you hear how homosexuals want to have families just like yours. — Sonja Dalton —————————— The following is excerpted from Gay Donor or Gay Dad?, by John Bowe, published Nov 19, 2006, by The New York Times: R. described himself as “a man in his 40s, voluntarily employed in the arts,” a situation made possible, he explained, by a private family income. His six-foot frame is fit and slim; his eyes, blue and bright. He dresses in a cultured but casual way, an aesthetic captured in his speech, in which phatic blips like “kind of” or “sort of” are interspersed with terms like “Richter-esque.” As in Gerhard, the German painter. In an effort to become a parent of a sort, R., who is gay, agreed, 11 years ago, to donate sperm to a lesbian couple aspiring to pregnancy. A few years before, R. became friendly with a woman — white and upper class like himself — through the gay activist world. They weren’t good friends, he said, “just friendly.” The woman had a partner, a middle-class black woman, whom R. knew less well but who seemed solid. The couple decided that the black partner would become impregnated with a white man’s sperm so that the baby would be biracial, reflecting the appearance of both mothers. They approached R. about being the donor. (Like all the subjects I spoke to for this article, R. asked that I not use his full name — R. is his middle initial.) It seemed like a good fit, R. said. “My life and my family background and my socioeconomic position kind of matched the profile of the nonbiological partner.” R. and the white woman even looked somewhat alike. R. had always loved being around kids, particularly his niece and nephew, whom he saw often. But like many gay men, R. never thought of himself as a likely candidate for fatherhood. He always felt that parents opting to raise a child alone were choosing a rocky road, and at the time, R. himself had no long-term partner. He did, however, have an ex-boyfriend who had started a donor relationship with two lesbians; it seemed to be going well. He quickly became taken with the idea. Having a child of his own, he thought, would mean creating a relationship more intense and involved than what he had with his siblings’ children. “I guess I felt that maybe I wanted to have some kind of more lasting relationships in my life,” he said. “I said I was interested.” Campus Humor for Conservatives: ACLU Solstice BarnDecember 6th, 2006Excerpted from ‘ACLU Solstice Barn’ Substitutes for Nativity, published Dec 6, 2006, by WorldNet Daily: In tongue-in-cheek deference to the American Civil Liberties Union, students at the University of Texas displayed an “ACLU Solstice Barn” on campus, featuring politically correct figures. ![]() “We’ve got Gary and Joseph instead of Mary and Joseph in order to symbolize ACLU support for ‘homosexual marriage,’ and of course there isn’t a Jesus in the manger,” said Tony McDonald, chairman of the Young Conservatives of Texas branch on the Austin campus. Mary Cheney Is PregnantDecember 6th, 2006Obviously, we’re saddened at the spectacle of the Vice President’s daughter, Mary Cheney, living in an open lesbian relationship, and now bringing a child into a home that is fatherless by design. In our view, this is another case of the “gay” movement putting its wants (in this case, having a child) above what’s best for children. “Two mommies” or “two daddies” will never substitute for a home with a married mom and a dad, and it is sad when men or women model immoral homosexual behavior before innocent children in a home setting.–Peter LaBarbera The following is excerpted from Mary Cheney and Partner Are About to Be Moms, by Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts, published Dec 6, 2006, by Washington Post: Mary Cheney, the vice president’s openly gay daughter, is pregnant. She and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, are “ecstatic” about the baby, due in late spring, said a source close to the couple. …Cheney, 37, was a key aide to her father during the 2004 reelection campaign and now is vice president for consumer advocacy at AOL. Poe, 45, a former park ranger, is renovating their Great Falls home. [Photo HERE.] …In November, Virginia voters passed a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and civil unions; state law is unclear on whether Poe could have full legal rights as a parent of Cheney’s child. The circumstances of the pregnancy will remain private, said the source close to the couple. This is the first child for both. Michael Medved: “Gay” Demands Shift from Equality to Special EndorsementDecember 6th, 2006Excerpted from Gay demands shift from equality to special endorsement, by Michael Medved, published Dec 6, 2006, by Townhall: [Discussing the homosexual adultery of Ted Haggard, Jim McGreevey, and Eugene Robinson…]
But what about those aging heterosexuals who may also suddenly discover– at age sixty, say—that they’ve been repressing their true identities? Couldn’t they also argue that it seemed suddenly inauthentic to remain trapped with a sagging partner of similar age, when a powerful, undeniable inner voice and the evolutionary imperative demanded they connect with nubile twenty-somethings eager for experienced and wealthy companionship? In fact, every study of human sexuality would suggest that far more men feel tempted to heed their deep-seated, undeniable authentic desires to cheat with other (particularly younger) women than feel drawn into relationships with other men. Does this greater incidence of heterosexual temptation make it more – or less– “natural” and worthy of respect than homosexual impulses? The tendency to forgive, or even endorse, same-sex attractions while condemning the vastly more common opposite gender desires, amounts to the granting of a preferential position to homosexuality. One of the most common arguments for gay marriage also carries with it the implicit assumption that gay relationships count as inherently superior, more durable and more meaningful than their straight counterparts… The idea of special recognition for gays and lesbians also applies to the efforts to grant homosexuals “protected status” as part of our civil rights and hate crimes legislation. No one would ever advance the idea that other common sexual behaviors based on deep-seated urges – such as chronic womanizing, or nymphomania, or obsessive addiction to pornography, or masochism – deserved governmental defense against discrimination or expressions of disapproval. As the national argument continues to rage regarding the proper social and governmental response to homosexuality, some of the advocates for radical change have unobtrusively but unmistakably shifted their campaign from a request for equal treatment to an assertion of innate superiority. They demand for gay impulses not the same treatment accorded to heterosexual desires, but far greater latitude and acceptance, along with uniquely privileged social sanction and legal endorsement. Bad News for the “Gay Rights” Movement: Right and Wrong Isn’t Dead YetDecember 5th, 2006This article is the first in a series by my good friend here in Illinois, John Biver, of the Family Taxpayers Network. We often hear that it’s only the “fundamentalist Christians” on the “radical right” who oppose normalizing homosexuality and that we Christians are determined to impose our belief system on everyone. Well, it’s not only conservative evangelicals and Catholics who recognize the problem; John Biver’s excellent series of articles proves that there is also a strong secular argument against elevating homosexuality to normalcy. — Peter LaBarbera
The following article entitled Right and Wrong Isn’t Dead Yet, by John Biver, was originally published Jun 14, 2006, by Family Taxpayer Network: Public opinion polls showing the progress of the “gay rights” movement are much like the poll numbers showing support for abortion in the early 1990s. Back then only the most principled political candidates ran as openly pro-life. The rest, especially those in squishy districts, kept their mouth shut out of fear of alienating what was a growing pro-choice majority. Today – it’s a new deal. Recent polls show a reversal of earlier trends. The pro-life side improved their work, sharpened their arguments and has become more effective than ever in making the case in defense of the unborn. Websites like that of Feminists for Life’s are good examples of where that debate is going – and that’s bad news for the pro-aborts. Certainly medical technology helped pro-lifers as well. As ultra-sound technology improved, pictures and videos made it more difficult for the other side to get away with using terms like “fetal tissue.” Other medical advances helped prove that babies were viable far earlier than poor old Justice Blackmun thought was possible. Similarly, those who understand the serious threat to the social fabric posed by the extremist “gay rights” agenda are really only now starting to get their act together. Pop culture and the mainstream press might still be the loudest voices in the arena, but they’re no longer alone. As alternative media and the Internet mature, the proper context of the debate will be set and the defense of traditional morality will improve. Just as technology aided the pro-lifers, the information age will aide in the debate over “gay rights.” For example, hiding the physical health consequences of certain behaviors will become increasingly difficult. Whether they like it or not, for example, certain body orifices weren’t designed for all the uses they’re being put to. Mother Nature is stubborn and won’t make adjustments for those unable to resist strong compulsions. Read the rest of this article » CosmoGirl! Magazine includes “Queer Peers”December 5th, 2006by Sonja Dalton CosmoGirl! editors have become “conversant with queer issues,” according to a pro-lesbian website. In an article entitled CosmoGirl! Includes Queer Peers (published Aug 8, 2006, by afterellen.com), writer Rose Yndigoyen says,
Ms. Yndigoyen offers this sample of Cosmo’s foray into lesbian love stories for adolescent girls:
Wonder why Cosmo is writing about lesbian teenagers? Ms. Yndigoyen explains:
Read the rest of this article » Let’s Do Our Christmas Shopping with the ‘Good Guys’December 5th, 2006by Donna Garner The HRC has actually done a great service for those of us who believe in traditional family values. All we have to do is the OPPOSITE of what HRC recommends. Following is a partial list of the companies, products, and services which we who believe in traditional family values need to patronize because they are not caving into the radical homosexual agenda. When we buy these products, we need to commend the management and tell them that we will patronize their companies, products, and services so long as they do not perpetuate the homosexual agenda: Let’s buy from the following:
Donna Garner is a Texas education advocate who taught for almost 33 years, and served as a writer/consultant for Scott & White’s “Worth the Wait” sex education curriculum, among other endeavors. She and her husband have been married for 43 years, have two sons, two daughters-in-law, and five grandchildren. |
|
||||||||
| Copyright © 2006-2021 Americans for Truth. All Rights Reserved. | ||||||||||