HRC, National LGBTQ Task Force and other homosexual groups work hand-in-hand with Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion lobby

Learning Activism from Planned Parenthood: LGBT activists work hand-in-hand with the Abortion Lobby. This is a notice for a day-long “institute” for LGBTQ activists to be held at the National LGBTQ Task Force’s “Creating Change” 2015 conference; it adopts Planned Parenthood tactics in the leftist crusade for “sexual rights.” The world’s leading abortion provider is very active in promoting homosexuality and gender confusion–and even fringe sexual “lifestyles” like BDSM (Bondage & Discipline, Dominance & Submission, Sadism & Masochism)–to young people. View the full  151-page Creating Change 2015 program HERE; we added the emphasis to this item, which is found on page 66. Creating Change 2015 will be held next month in Denver. Click to enlarge.

AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera issued the following statement on January 22, 2015–the 42nd anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which, along with the companion case Doe v. Bolton, ushered in legalized abortion-on-demand as a privacy “right” across the United States:

“On this day marking the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we remember and memorialize the unborn victims of abortion-on-demand. We stand with Americans and people the world over who are working to stop the ongoing massacre of innocents made possible by this judicial travesty.

“Sadly, many pro-homosexual groups like Human Rights Campaign and the National LGBTQ Task Force also aggressively promote abortion ‘rights.’ Planned Parenthood, in addition to being the world’s biggest abortion provider, actively promotes homosexuality, bisexuality, gender confusion–and even sadomasochism–to young people.

“Ideas and laws–and unjust court decisions–have consequences, and today is a reminder that the Culture of Death and Disease takes an immense toll on humanity. We must continue to stand up for the most defenseless in society by working to stop abortion.”

Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH)

Both justices performed homosexual “marriages” 

No Justice: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is hardly impartial on the issue of homosexuality-based “marriage’ (just as she isn’t on abortion). According to AFA, Ginsburg has “officiated” at five counterfeit same-sex “weddings.” Justice Elena Kagan has also performed sodomy-based “marriage” rituals. AFA says both “activist” justices should recuse themselves from SCOTUS cases on the issue.

American Family Association) Press Release

Friday, January 16, 2015

Kagan and Ginsburg: Recuse Yourselves!

American Family Association Says Supreme Court Justices Should Step Down on SCOTUS Marriage Cases

[Note: AFTAH has added quote marks around the word “marriage”–as in same-sex “marriage”–in all non-quotation references to the term in the original release–to preserve the natural, age-old understanding of the word.]

TUPELO, Miss.—The issue of same-sex “marriage” in America has divided the country this past year, with state, district and federal courts issuing ruling after ruling.

In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s announcement that it will hear the issue, American Family Association (AFA, www.afa.net) says Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg should recuse themselves from making any same-sex “marriage” decisions because they have both conducted same-sex marriage ceremonies.

“Both of these justices’ personal and private actions that actively endorse gay marriage clearly indicate how they would vote on same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court,” said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “Congress has directed that federal judicial officers must disqualify themselves from hearing cases in specified circumstances. Both Kagan and Ginsburg have not only been partial to same-sex marriage but they have also proven themselves to be activists in favor of it. In order to ensure the Court’s integrity and impartiality, both should recuse themselves from same-sex marriage cases. Congress has an obligation to Americans to see that members of the Supreme Court are held to the highest standards of integrity. The law demands it, and the people deserve it.”

AFA sent an Action Alert to its one million-plus supporters, asking them to write a letter to their members of Congress, urging them to remind members of the nation’s highest court of their charge to maintain impartiality. Title 28, Part I, Chapter 21, Section 455 of the U.S. Code titled “Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge,” states that “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Kagan performed a September 21, 2014, same-sex “marriage” ceremony for her former law clerk and his partner in Maryland. And Ginsburg performed a same-sex “marriage” ceremony at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington D.C., in August 2013.

OneNewsNow.com, AFA’s news service, also reported that Ginsburg has officiated at least five same-sex “marriage” ceremonies.

AFTAH News Release

December 31, 2014

By Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org; americansfortruth@gmail.com; 312-324-3787

The year 2014 in America saw an unprecedented overreach by the judiciary, with federal judges–contemptuous or at least dismissive of the people’s clearly-expressed will–striking down as “unconstitutional” popular state ballot measures preserving the age-old definition of marriage as between husband and wife.

Only an “evolving Constitution” could countenance so-called rights and “marriage” based on sexual deviancy. Legislators, not courts, change the law, and well into the 20th Century most states had laws on their books banning homosexual sodomy—once known as the infamous “crime against Nature.” To this day homosexual acts remain “against Nature,” hence their disproportionate association with sexual diseases like HIV and syphilis—which is why MSM (men having sex with men) is a red flag for blood donations.

Today’s judicial supremacists—with media sycophants in tow—don’t care that the United States Supreme Court has already established precedent in 1972 against using the Fourteen Amendment–designed to combat institutionalized racism left over from slavery–to legalize homosexuality-based “marriage.” The Supreme Court dismissed in an appeal of the Minnesota Supreme Court decision Baker vs. Nelson in which the majority wrote:

“[I]n commonsense and in a constitutional sense, there is a clear distinction between a marital restriction based merely upon race and one based upon the fundamental difference in sex.”  

The 2014 judicial avalanche in favor of radically redefining marriage to accommodate homosexual behavior exposes a key contradiction of the Left: on the one hand progressives bemoan voter-ID laws, arguing that these laws are purposely designed to make it harder for African-Americans and likely Democratic voters to cast a ballot.

On the other hand, “progressives” like those inhabiting the offices of the ACLU overwhelmingly support judicial negation of successful state constitutional amendments preserving marriage as between one man and one woman—in states like Utah, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma and Florida. Each of these court rulings imposing “gay marriage” disenfranchises millions of Americans on the issue.

Moreover, polls show that Black Americans are a strong demographic in support of traditional marriage. So effectively, to use Twitter-ese, liberals are saying that #BlackVotesMatter–except when it comes to popular state amendments rejecting homosexuality-based “marriage,” for which (millions of) #BlackVotesDoNotCount.

Sexual revolutionaries have cunningly have mastered the art of using government power through the manipulation of the law to legitimize their sin, in this case homosexual behavior–which God calls an abomination (“detestable”; see Leviticus 20:13) and a sin that can be overcome through Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). So naturally the Left has exulted in the tendency of most courts to reject overwhelmingly popular ballot measures designed to protect the historic definition of marriage.

Court’s defense of religious liberty for profit-making companies could help Christian small businessmen oppressed by “gay rights” laws

Current U.S. Supreme Court: left to right in back: Sotomayor, Breyer, Alito, Kagan. Front, left to right: Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg. Alito wrote the Hobby Lobby decision, and Kennedy is lionized by “gay” activists for writing last year’s decision striking down DOMA. Click to enlarge.

By Peter LaBarbera

It’s easy to understand why hard-core feminists with their frenzied, overblown “War on Women” rhetoric would be outraged by the Supreme Court upholding Hobby Lobby’s right as a Christian-run corporation not to be forced to provide abortifacients to its employees through an Obama-care mandate. (See Hillary’s misinformation on the decision HERE.) But why are liberal “gay” activists freaking out over the Hobby Lobby ruling?

The case was never about denying women birth control, but you wouldn’t know that from the “reporting” by liberal media and hyperventilating “progressive” bloggers. Hobby Lobby still provides 16 forms of birth control as a health benefit to its employees, but its founders—along with another Christian-owned corporation, Conestoga Wood Specialists—sued HHS over being forced to provide four contraceptive methods that could terminate a fertilized egg.

Hobby Lobby’s founders, David and Barbara Green, are committed Christians who believe that life begins at conception and should be protected. To quote the Court decision, “Hobby Lobby’s statement of purpose commits the Greens to ‘[h]onoring the Lord in all [they] do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles.’” So strong is the Greens’ commitment to Jesus Christ that they have lost countless millions of dollars in profits over the years by closing their 500 craft stores nationwide on Sunday.

Now, one would think that obtaining cheap, subsidized contraception would be low on the priority list for homosexuals, seeing that two men or two women by themselves cannot produce a child. Nevertheless, Big Gay Inc is in a tizzy over the Supreme Court decision—because Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby isn’t really about contraceptives but rather whether Americans like the Greens will be free to live out their religious convictions.

Immediately after the decision, feminists flew into a rage, circulating crude versions of Justice Ginsburg’s dissent and distortions about women being denied birth control by their “male bosses.” Too bad most Americans will never read the actual Hobby Lobby decision—which lays out two diametrically opposed, competing visions about freedom of conscience and the role of government in these United States.

Freedom of conscience vs. Big Government

Hobby Lobby’s owners, David and Barbara Green, seek to use their business to glorify Jesus Christ. Their 500 stores across the country are closed on Sundays, costing the Greens many millions of dollars in profits.

On the side of preserving and even expanding Americans’ religious liberty were five judges: Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. In his concurring opinion Kennedy writes:

“In our constitutional tradition, freedom means that all persons have the right to believe or strive to believe in a divine creator and a divine law. For those who choose this course, free exercise is essential in preserving their own dignity and in striving for a self-definition shaped by their religious precepts. Free exercise in this sense implicates more than just freedom of belief….It means, too, the right to express those beliefs and to establish one’s religious (or non-religious) self-definition in the political, civic, and economic life of our larger community.”

On the other side—of Big Government overriding citizens’ religious beliefs, restricting conscience exemptions to federal mandates, and putting federal power behind expanded access to entitlements–were Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer and Kagan. In fact, Ginsburg spends nearly two pages in her dissent [see pp. 24-25] defending the idea that Obama-care’s provision of subsidies for IUD’s (intrauterine devices) –one of the four contraceptives resisted by Hobby Lobby as a potential abortifacient—is a “compelling government interest.”

As much as Ginsburg believes the majority’s “immoderate” reading of Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is too broad, hers is too narrow: she ends by arguing that exemptions under the RFRA should be limited to explicitly religious organizations—leaving for-profit Christian businessmen like the Greens unprotected.

The bigger government gets–in both its “social justice” mission and the amount of goodies it gives out as “entitlements”—the greater the threat to Americans’ right to freely exercise their faith. This is precisely why homosexual activists are nervous about Hobby Lobby’s victory. If the nation’s highest court grants that even very large “closely held” family businesses like Hobby Lobby (which has more than 13,000 employees) possess a religious liberty claim under RFRA, then surely small family businesses like Elane Photography in New Mexico—owned by Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin—should have the right not to use their creative talents to serve homosexual “weddings,” which violate their Christian faith.