By Micah Clark
Reprinted from the AFA of Indiana newsletter

There is an excellent article from John Stonestreet, the president of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, detailing a surprisingly honest article in the liberal publication, The Huffington Post.    Stonestreet comments on a homosexual male who wrote an article expressing his despair in his lifestyle and explaining that so many “gay” men in his community share this despair.   The cultural, legal and political affirmation of homosexuality in America is not filling the emptiness many feel or reducing the many risks of their lifestyle.

Stonestreet writes in “An Unspoken Epidemic: The Silent Suffering of Gay Men” (bolded emphasis added):

“For years,” he begins, “I’ve noticed the divergence between my straight friends and my gay friends. While one half of my social circle has disappeared into relationships, kids and suburbs, the other has struggled through isolation and anxiety, hard drugs and risky (behavior).”

Through story after story and mountains of statistics, Hobbes then documents a consistent and chilling trend among those who share his lifestyle. “Gay men everywhere, at every age,” he writes, are two-to-ten-times more likely than heterosexual men to commit suicide.

And that’s just the beginning. Homosexual males also suffer from higher rates of cardiovascular disease, cancer, allergies, asthma, and a whole host of behavior-related infections and dysfunctions. They’re twice as likely to experience major depressive episodes, report having fewer close friends, and abuse drugs at an alarming rate.

In fact, living in so-called “gay neighborhoods” is a predictor of more frequent, risky behaviors and methamphetamine use. And, Hobbes adds, the community itself is brutal and degrading to its members. Smart-phone hookup apps drive a culture of exploitation and casual encounters that one young man he interviewed said made him feel like “a piece of meat.”

We often hear these disastrous statistics and stories attributed to homophobia, bullying, and shame. Having been treated horribly since childhood, men like this author—the oft-repeated myth goes—are forced to live a lie. They’re depressed because they’ve been oppressed and repressed.

But here’s the problem with the bullying hypothesis. In countries like the Netherlands and Sweden where same-sex “marriage” has been the law of the land for years, gay men remain three times more susceptible to mood disorders and three- to ten-times more likely to engage in “suicidal self-harm.”

A Nation of “My Truths”: Barna Research Group graphic shows high percentages of Americans (including Christians) who believe in subjective morality. See full Barna story on the new, “self-fulfillment morality” HERE. Click to enlarge.

By Micah Clark, AFA of Indiana

If you are familiar with the story of Noah’s Ark beyond a Sunday School flannel graph, you’ll likely recall that the times in which Noah lived were described as days of exceptional evil across the earth. This saddened the heart of God. Many observers think that we are living in days of global evil again. I am not sure if we are in similar times, but there’s no doubt that the mass killing of Muslims and Christians all across the globe from civil wars and radical Islam saddens God’s heart.

In parts of the Bible, similar times of exceptional evil are described as times in which “everyone did what was right in their own eyes” or according to themselves. Morality was in the eye of the beholder. Nothing was off limits anymore because it was up to each person’s heart, no matter how confused or depraved, to determine. How else can one explain the insanity of Lot’s offering his own daughters up to crazed men in Sodom under the guise of good manners and cultural norms?

In this backdrop, a new study from the Barna Research Group may concern many while also explaining much of the evil in America. Entitled, “The End of Absolutes: America’s New Moral Code” Barna’s research finds that the vast majority of Americans (80 percent) express concern about our nation’s moral condition. Every demographic shares this concern, with 89 percent of elders, 87 percent of baby-boomers, 75 percent of Gen-X’ers and 74 percent of Millennials expressing concerns about America’s moral condition. Although 90 percent of Christians express concern over our moral decline, even 67 percent of adults of no faith say they have concerns about America’s values.

Micah Clark

“It also appears that under the changes released today, it may be impossible for a business or individual to even make a claim under RFRA [the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act] of an infringement of their religious liberty in many parts of Indiana.”–Micah Clark, AFA-Indiana

Micah Clark, executive director of American Family Association of Indiana–and a wonderful pro-family advocate who does outstanding work in the Hoosier State–sent the following e-letter to his constituents today–after new proposed language surfaced amending the state’s new religious freedom law:

________________

Friends,

As you know, over the weekend, Governor Mike Pence began discussing a clarification of Indiana Senate Bill 101. This was due to the mass misinformation and fear campaign mobilized against it and against our entire state. He did not ask for a change to a newly enacted statute which has been proven, established and non-controversial language for 22 years.

The actions taken by the Indiana General Assembly do not clarify our Religious Freedom Restoration Act’s purposes or goals. Our legal advisors tell us that it actually changes our law in a way that could now erode religious freedom across Indiana. If this revised law does not adequately protect religious liberty for all, it is not really a religious freedom act.

What is worse, unlike our current law, this new language’s impact is something upon which few attorneys or legal scholars will likely agree.

We have also been advised that it is possible that the proposed changes may no longer protect a company like Hobby Lobby from participation in abortion matters. One of the primary motivations behind SB 101 was to protect the rights of conscience for business owners regarding their beliefs about abortion.

It also appears that under the changes released today, it may be impossible for a business or individual to even make a claim under RFRA of an infringement of their religious liberty in many parts of Indiana.

On the positive side there is some language left which protects Hoosiers from a government action against their religious beliefs.

We understand that legislators have been threatened with significant economic harms and bullied in many ways. We understand that Indiana has been unfairly harmed by blatant lies and a misinformation campaign around something for which RFRA laws have never been successfully used. We do not blame legislators for wanting to protect Indiana from a mob mentality. political opportunism, and mass hysteria.

AFA of Indiana is asking Governor Pence to veto these changes for the above reasons and because they went far beyond what he asked the legislature to do. If you would like to contact the Governor’s office, you can call 317-232-4567.

Thank you, and please continue to pray for this matter, our leaders, and our great state.

Best regards,
Micah Clark
Executive Director

Micah Clark

Congratulations to American Family Association of Indiana Executive Director Micah Clark and other pro-family leaders in the state for passage of SB 101, which hopefully will help protect the freedom of conscience of Indiana citizens for decades to come. I also read a good piece on Reason.com by Scott Shackfork debunking the main objection to the bill–which homosexual and transgender activists are smearing as the “Indiana Right to Discriminate” law.

Pro-homosexual and pro-transgender laws discriminate against people of faith and morality and women desiring privacy in public restrooms, respectively, but I suppose that kind of discrimination is tolerable to the Left because it accelerates the “gay” and “progressive” transformation of society. Thank God that defenders of liberty are fighting back. Below Clark answers some of the lies against SB 101. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

________________________

Hobby Lobby Bill Has Been Sent to Governor Pence

By Micah Clark, AFA of Indiana

Yesterday Senate Bill 101 cleared the last procedural step before going to the Governor’s office.  After the bill passed the Indiana House on Monday by a solid 63-31 vote, the Senate voted on the concurrence motion with another strong vote of 40-10.

The bill is now headed to the Governor’s office.  Yet, this movement has not stopped the silliness surrounding this tested legislation.  Yesterday, I even had a call at the AFA-IN office that nearly takes the cake, though it is hard to get beyond the vile allegation that this would allow people of faith to bomb abortion clinics.  The confused caller was worried that our Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) could be used to keep certain people of faith from being allowed to drive on the Indiana toll roads.

The hostility of the far Left never ceases to amaze me.  Ironically, one thing this debate has revealed is the deep hostility that is out there against people of faith.  It practically makes the case as to why SB 101 is needed.   If you still doubt that those on the political Left and those in the homosexual activist movement want to force all people, including those with deep religious conviction, to embrace the homosexual agenda, then you haven’t paid close attention to this debate over religious liberty.

There have been so many lies repeated in the media and by opponents on this legislation that it is difficult to know where to start. Perhaps the best way, though, by no means comprehensive is to address a few things in bullet points.  Here I go:

• “A license to discriminate” – perhaps the biggest lie about this law is that it is a vehicle for discrimination.  As I noted in the AFA-IN donor newsletter, Indiana Family Voice, SB 101 is only discriminatory if we radically redefine discrimination, which many liberals and homosexuals clearly want to do.  This law does not allow a person of faith to deny service to someone, nor should it.  No Christian bakery owner should say that people involved in homosexual behavior couldn’t shop in their bakery.  That, in my opinion is wrong, un-Christian and discriminatory unless the patron is misbehaving ( i.e. “no shirt, no shoes, no service“).   However, when a customer seeks special participation from the baker, asking him or her to specially decorate a “gay” wedding cake and come set it up at a homosexual wedding, then there is a very different line crossed, and a problem for most people of faith.  However, while SB 101 could be cited as a defense in such a case, as could the 1^st Amendment, courts thus far have not seen RFRA as very compelling in such cases.