Heather Nauert, President Trump’s nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.

Folks, the following is an excerpt from a 2017 story in the Washington Blade, a newspaper for homosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders in the nation’s capital, regarding then-State Department spokesman and current Trump nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Heather Nauert.

Pro-LGBTQ activism and advocacy was a fixture of the Obama years, and social conservatives hoped it would stop under President Trump. Yet it persists, usually through official recognition of special LGBTQ activist “days” like this. Surely there are deep divisions within Trump’s foreign policy team, which by definition includes many Obama holdovers, on whether and how strongly the United States should engage in pro-homosexual/-bisexual/-transgender advocacy of this sort.

When I first heard of Nauert’s nomination, all I could think of was how bizarre it is that Nauert, just years from being a Fox News persona, would likely hold the same position as the esteemed Jeane Kirkpatrick, Reagan’s steely UN ambassador, who played a pivotal role in facing down Soviet aggression and ultimately the fall of Soviet communism. Try as I might, I cannot imagine Kirkpatrick donning purple and hawking a pro-homosexual “Spirit Day.” Let’s just leave it at that. (The event is organized by the anti-Christian LGBTQ leftist group GLAAD.)

If Nauert becomes one of the world’s most prominent international “gay/trans rights” advocates, it would be a significant betrayal of Trump’s electoral mandate and a great victory for the powerful leftist social forces pushing American-style immorality on the world. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

________________________

From the  Washington Blade (Oct. 19, 2017:

State Department Spokesman Acknowledges Spirit Day

State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert on [Oct. 19, 2017] acknowledged a campaign that seeks to combat bullying.

Nauert at the beginning of a press briefing told reporters that “today, along with many of my colleagues here at the State Department, including members of the LGBTI community, in association with GLIFAA (a group that represents LGBT and intersex Foreign Service members), we are — many of us are wearing purple today to celebrate Spirit Day.”

“On Spirit Day, we speak out against bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered and intersex persons and stand with LGBTI youth who disproportionally face bullying and harassment because of their identities,” she said.

Nauert — who was wearing purple — said LGBT and intersex people around the world “face increasing physical attacks, arbitrary arrests just because of who they are or who they love.”

Homosexual activists fret over Neil Gorsuch’s judicial philosophy and record; Log Cabin Republicans noncommittal

Let the “Borking” Begin: Homosexual legal group Lambda Legal runs photo of Trump’s SCOTUS nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, with the word “Dangerous” printed over his face.

By Peter LaBarbera

Trump giveth, and Trump taketh away. Days after giving homosexual activists a huge gift by NOT rescinding a 2014 Obama executive order forcing federal contractors to have an LGBT “nondiscrimination” policy, Trump offered up a constitutional “originalist,” Judge Neil Gorsuch, to replace deceased Justice Antonin Scalia.

That led the coddled array of deviant-sex-and-gender leftist groups, otherwise known as the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) movement, to go ballistic [see my LifeSiteNews piece here].

Note that, regarding one 2015 decision by Circuit Court Judge Gorsuch involving a gender-confused prisoner, the LGBTQ Lobby almost literally has its (transgender) panties in a wad. (The poor fella in the case, a “male-to-female” transsexual, was not permitted to wear “feminine undergarments” in jail. Boo-hoo.)

It is hardly shocking that the same homosexual and transgender activists who create “rights” based on sodomitic inclinations and same-sex/gender-confused feelings would fear a man like Gorsuch, who is being compared to the brilliant conservative Justice Scalia. The latter repeatedly eviscerated the “living, breathing Constitution” judicial philosophy of “progressives” that discovers “rights” out of thin air to accommodate modern social ills like abortion-on-demand, homosexuality and pornography.

Even honest liberals might agree with this: it is difficult to find a “constitutional” right for two dudes to “marry” seeing that sodomy itself was illegal in most colonies and a taboo at the time of the Constitution’s framing. (“Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor,” the left-biased Wikipedia reports.)

So even though the newly elected Trump choked badly by telling 60 Minutes that legalized same-sex “marriage” via the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling is “settled law” (while somehow Roe v. Wade is not), the Supreme Court could be just one more Trump appointment away from reversing it and sending “gay marriage” back to the states. That freaks out the Homosexual Lobby, which, like the Left in general, regards its SCOTUS victories as permanent, and pro-family wins like the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick decision upholding sodomy laws as temporary.

Here’s a quick rundown with links on some of the larger LGBTQ organizations’ hostile statements against Gorsuch; most of these are excerpts (note source links attached to group name). Also note the nuanced, noncommittal statement of the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans on Trump’s nominee:

GLAAD (formerly Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination):

“Neil Gorsuch’s harmful history of discrimination against the LGBTQ community renders him completely unfit to sit on the highest court in the land,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, GLAAD President & CEO. “He has record of advocating for anti-LGBTQ rhetoric or supporting candidates that are in favor of open discrimination against people and families who simply want to be treated the same as everyone else. Gorsuch’s presence on the Supreme Court will affect the law of the land for generations to come – long after Trump is out of office, and will turn back the clock on equality and acceptance.”

Folks, we’re catching up on “AFTAH in the News” items. Here’s a story about the hit animated movie “Frozen” from back in May by Charlie Butts and Billy Davis of AFA’s One News Now–featuring AFTAH commenting on the pro-homosexual/-transgender lobby’s fanatical drive to use Hollywood to normalize their deviancies.

Isn’t it interesting that even though LGBTQ characters are over represented on film and TV relative to the homosexual population, “gay” and now “transgender” activists still play the victim card and demand MORE homosexual and gender-confused characters!

We must resist LGBT pressure campaigns like this and stop merely “taking it” from the aggressive Left, because due to ubiquitous pro-“queer” (their word) propaganda, impressionable kids are more confused about sex and gender than ever. – – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org

___________________________

Discuss web-based intimidation network that is wearing down conservatives

Salem Radio host Janet Mefferd interviewed AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera yesterday (Jan. 20, 2015) about Fox News’ decision to request that its nightly “Special Report” anchor Bret Baier pull out as a scheduled speaker at a Legatus conference after a homosexual activist complained that Legatus, a national Catholic businessmen’s group, is “very anti-gay.” Baier himself is a Catholic, and defended his withdrawal from the event. Fox News is a major donor to a homosexual journalists group. Click HERE for the MP3 audio link to the hour-long interview [or click on the image at right].

It may be easier to listen at Janet’s website audio player: [go HERE].

The two also discussed Hollywood’s current obsession with promoting homosexuality and gender confusion.

Here is Mefferd’s website description of the show:

Janet Mefferd-1/20/2alam015-Hour 1-Janet Mefferd Radio Show

JANUARY 20, 2015 BY JANET MEFFERD SHOW

Hour 1- Fox News anchor Bret Baier pulled out of a speaking engagement for a conservative Catholic group after a homosexual activist labeled the group “very anti-gay.” Peter LaBarbera from Americans for Truth About Homosexuality stops by to discuss his thoughts on the effects of the LGBT Thought Police.

__________________________________

Related AFTAH Stories:

• “Fox News Throws Catholic Group Legatus Under the Bus” [has full contact information for Bret Baier, Gary Sinise, etc.]
• “Bret Baier Confirms Fox News Requested that He Pull Out of Legatus Event”

Crude effort to block pro-family speech in Canada not unlike GLAAD/SPLC crusade to censor pro-family voices opposed to homosexuality in media

“I would like for him to be turned away from our border….Peter LaBarbera should not be allowed to enter our country. His sole purpose of entering Canada is to spread his message of hate and intolerance.”–Bailey Ashton Brookes, Intolerance Free Weyburn, in a public letter to Canada’s Minister of Public Safety, Steven Blaney

“Tolerance,” Canadian Style: Canadian pro-life and pro-family activist Bill Whatcott poses for photo with adversary and anti-“intolerance” activist Bailey Ashton Brookes, who is lobbying the State to keep AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera out of Saskatchewan, Canada, where he is scheduled to give a talk Oct. 11-12.

By Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

Folks, below is the verbatim copy of a Facebook letter by “Intolerance Free Weyburn” [Saskatchewan] activist Bailey Ashton Brookes. She is urging others to write Steven Blaney, Canada’s Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, to bar my entry into Canada, where I am scheduled as a speaker at the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association (SPLA) conference in Weyburn, October 11-12. [see original AFTAH story HERE; see letters by Joe Scheidler and Mary Anne Hackett defending me as a speaker].

“I would like for him to be turned away from our border,” Brookes writes.

Despite the Left’s history of censorship and totalitarianism, I am a bit taken aback to be the target of such an outrageous attempt to intimidate SPLA’s leaders into jettisoning me as a speaker–and then lobbying the State to ban me as a supposed purveyor of “hate.”

It’s one thing to write and poke fun at the “pro-Gay Thought Police,” and quite another to be in its crosshairs.

Here we have an object lesson on the inevitable end-result of political correctness–in the form of leftist “thought control” fused with State power. For years now, the far-left-biased Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has maliciously smeared my group, AFTAH, as well as dozens of other pro-family organizations like American Family Association and Family Research Council as “hate groups.” Then fellow travelers on the Left, led by LGBT activists, circulate the SPLC’s lie as if it is some kind of authoritative evidence that AFTAH and this writer are truly “hateful.”

In Canada, bereft of a First Amendment, mischievous “progressives” can cause more trouble faster than in the U.S., by citing legal bans on “hate speech” that have been upheld by the country’s highest court. Canadian Bill Whatcott, a brave pro-life and pro-family activist who will be speaking at the conference  next week, has been victimized by such “hate speech” prosecutions. So have many good Canadians like Stephen Boissoin, who have been dragged through preposterous “human rights tribunals” merely because they voiced opposition to the Sin of Sodom.

SPLC smears go worldwide

SPLC’s One-Sided “Hate” Scam: Remember this leftist brick attack on AFTAH’s banquet in 2011? The Chicago-based Gay Liberation Network (GLN) publicly refused to condemn it–demonstrating actual hatred. Yet the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has never labelled GLN–or any homosexual organization–a “hate group,” while slandering dozens of pro-family organizations like AFTAH with that false smear. The words on the paver brick thrown through the glass doors of the Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL, refer to AFTAH banquet speaker and honoree Scott Lively.

The SPLC’s corruption and radical pro-homosexual bias is illustrated by the fact that it has never designated an LGBT organization as a “hate group.” In fact, the Chicago-based Gay Liberation Network (GLN), which took great pride in “reporting” AFTAH to the SPLC as a potential “hate group,” later publicly refused to condemn a brick attack against the school, Christian Liberty Academy, that hosted our 2011 banquet! [See AFTAH original story on the pro-homosexual brick attack.]

That’s real hate as opposed to ideologically-defined “hate.” Yet the SPLC has yet to designate GLN as a “hate group.” The good news is that many Americans and pundits finally are seeing through the SPLC’s “hate” scam.

Most activists on the Left are not as brazen as Ms. Brookes and her husband in pressing the censor card, but these two “morality-phobic” individuals are merely applying a more extreme and crass version of the pro-LGBT Left’s hardball tactics. Homosexual activist groups like GLAAD (formerly the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)–working with others like the SPLC–continually and falsely equate opposition to homosexuality with “hate.” They also throw around the ominous-sounding charge of “homophobia”–implying that their opponents are filled with irrational fear as opposed to disagreeing with immoral and unhealthy sexual behavior.

Then this Coalition on the Left pressures the media not to give a voice to the haters, homophobes and bigots. In recent years, they have expanded their crusade to include the enemy of “religious-based bigotry.” In their pride, they possess little regard for the sincerity and motives of Christians and others who genuinely seek to defend God’s moral order (“righteousness” in the Bible)–while holding out the hope of healthy change as personified by the many men and women who have left homosexuality (“gayness”) behind.

Since these illogical arguments and self-serving tactics can easily be defeated by pro-family advocates, pro-LGBT militants would rather just shut groups like AFTAH down in the Public Square. Endlessly playing their “anti-hate” card, they plead with the media to stop including the “other side” in their stories–stoking the ridiculous notion that no legitimate opposition to homosexualism (“gay rights”) exists. I’m afraid this is how countless cowed and ill-informed Western journalists think about homosexuality today. The arrogance and injustice of deciding for everyone what supposedly constitutes “hate,” “intolerance” and appropriate arguments in this Culture War debate apparently is lost on these liberal Speech Police and their media accomplices.