Americans for Truth

Sometimes words fail ... like when Peter LaBarbera chimes in on Uganda's "kill the gays" bill to claim that the US has no business lecturing Uganda about homosexuality and demand an explanation of why Warren Throckmorton, who opposes the bill, is still employed at Grove City College:

Folks, I’ve been trying to avoid the Ugandan “Culture War” on homosexuality because I figure we’re busy enough with our own here in the USA. But that hasn’t stopped American homosexual activists and fellow travelers like Professor Warren Throckmorton of the “evangelical” Grove City College from insinuating themselves into the Ugandan situation.

...

Here’s the question I keep asking myself about the Uganda controversy: just what is it that qualifies the United States of America to lecture the Ugandans about homosexuality? Is it our public policy that enshrines immoral sexual behavior (oops: “sexual orientation”) and gender confusion (er…”gender identity and expression”) as a “civil right”? Is it our homosexual “marriage” laws that make a mockery of this divine institution (laws about which Prof. Throckmorton is curiously silent)? How about our pro-homosexuality educational propaganda in K-12 schools that corrupts young students’ minds in the name of “tolerance”? Or the 24/7 “gay bathhouses” and sex clubs that proliferate in urban centers across the United States to facilitate quick-and-easy (and anonymous) deviant sexual hook-ups? (“Come to America: where you can have all the safe sodomy you want! Discounts for students (no joke) and free condoms available for your perverted pleasure!”)

Tell me: does Uganda have something to learn from Christian “defectors” like the opportunistic Prof. Throckmorton — who is now a de facto promoter of homosexuality as normal, natural and healthy while ostensibly still claiming some sort of “Christian” mission at GCC? (Grove City College boasts in evangelical circles that it is “authentically Christian” — an advertising claim of diminishing accuracy the longer it abides likes of Throckmorton.)

[TAKE ACTION: contact Grove City College HERE and GCC President Richard G. Jewell (rgjewell@gcc.edu; 724-458-2500) and request a written explanation as to why they employ an activist professor who undermines the Bible's clear teachings on homosexuality as a changeable sin (and not a natural "orientation").]

I've tried to ignore the latest nonsense from Senate candidate Andy Martin and his allegations that Rep. Mark Kirk is gay because, frankly, Martin is a certified nut. 

If I posted on every crazy thing Martin said, this blog would consist of nothing else ... like his claims that Max Baucus is a "habitual sex offender" or that Wikipedia "is a tax-exempt protosocialist scam that seeks to harass Republicans, conservatives and Obama opponents."

But Peter LaBabera doesn't think that Martin is a loon, which is why Martin participated in the Americans for Truth fundraising banquet earlier this year:

David Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute, accepted an award on behalf of Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman of the American Family Association (AFA) and American Family Radio. [Wildmon, who is recovering from encephalitis, was the recipient of AFTAH's first annual American Truth Teller Award; his son, AFA President Tim Wildmon, thanked Americans For Truth with a video message played at the banquet.]

Though the AFTAH banquet was not a political event, two candidates seeking statewide office were present. Dan Proft, who is running for Governor in the GOP primary and Andy Martin, who is seeking the Republican Party nomination in the U.S. Senate race, joined pro-family supporters at the AFTAH fundraiser.

So that is why it comes as no surprise that LaBarbera seems to think Martin's claims and antics are perfectly acceptable, even though he doesn't mention him by name:

Do voters have a right to know that their Congressman — especially one that bills himself as “pro-family” — is having adulterous affairs with women? Yes. Do the same voters have a right to know if their Congressman is himself a homosexual — especially since he will likely be voting on “gay”-related legislation predicated on the (false) assumption that homosexuality is a “civil rights” criterion? You bet they do.

In this post-Will & Grace age in which vulgar sodomy jokes are aired uncensored on primetime TV, it is unfair, hypocritical and simply odd to enable homosexual candidates to hide their pet sexual sin behind the “gay” “closet” — or to demand that any questions on the topic are inappropriate. I write this as one who hoped for the defeat of Republican “pro-family” politicians who were exposed as philanderers.

So our question to any candidate around which “gay” rumors are swirling is this:

Are you a homosexual — i.e., or have you practiced homosexual behavior or been in “gay” relationships?

There is no easy way to ask this awkward question, but it is as relevant as asking a candidate rumored to be a cad if he has been faithful to his wife. From a Christian perspective, sexual sin is sexual sin, and the politics of homosexuality and “outing” should not be dictated by the needs and wants of pro-homosexuality advocates or the GLBT Lobby.

The problems and ethical implications of secretly “gay” politicians are also exacerbated by the policy of homosexual activist “outers” who specialize in exposing the homosexuality on only the candidates they regard as hypocritical (read: anti-homosexual-agenda) on homosexual issues. This creates an incentive for covertly homosexual pols to vote pro-”gay” on GLBT legislation because that will lessen the likelihood of an embarrasing [sic] “outing” episode.

This is another reason why voters deserve to know if their representative or potential representative has a conflict of interest on homosexuality issues.

If you are a Republican and you think it’s unfair for homsoexual politicans [sic] to have their homosexuality revealed, here’s three words for you: Mark Foley scandal. As one who monitors the “gay” press, I knew about Foley’s homosexuality years before the page scandal happened — and had GOP leaders not swept that under the rug, perhaps the whole sordid Foley episode could have been avoided, and all its bad consequences for the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.

Any candidate hit with the “gay” question can simply answer my question above. We hope they wouldn’t lie about it, but that seems to have happened with one Republican candidate in Illinois who I sought answers from on the homosexual issue.

Earlier this year, GOProud, a new gay conservative group, appeared on the scene intent on finding ways to sell the conservative agenda to gays. 

Their approach has been to eschew the "traditional" gay issues like hate crimes protections or the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in favor arguing that healthcare reform would be bad for gays, that "the inheritance tax is really a gay tax," or claiming that the best way to stop hate crimes is to expand gun ownership.

But GOProud does also support things like marriage equality and the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell ... and for that reason the Religious Right's professional anti-gay activists at Americans for Truth and the Liberty Counsel are now threatening to boycott the annual CPAC conference if GOProud is allowed to serve as an official co-sponsor:

Folks, for years religious conservatives have been complaining about getting the shaft from CPAC, the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. There is usually only a token panel or two dealing with “Culture War” social issues like abortion and homosexuality (and rarely one explicitly on fighting the “gay” agenda) – as organizers seek to appease the CPAC libertarians, some of whom support goals like homosexual “marriage” that are anathema to socially conservatives.

Now CPAC’s tenuous ”Big Tent” could collapse altogether as social conservatives led by Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber threaten to launch a boycott of the conference (scheduled for Feb. 18-20, 2010) unless CPAC drops a homosexual activist group, GOProud, as a co-sponsor. Barber, my good friend, an AFTAH Board Member, and the Director of Cultural Affairs at Liberty Counsel, is leading the charge to keep the CPAC sponsorship list … conservative.

...

It boils down to this: there is nothing “conservative” about — as Barber inimitably puts it — “one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’” Or two women awkwardly mimicking natural procreative relations or raising a child together in an intentionally fatherless home. This does not mean that people practicing those and other immoral (and changeable) behaviors cannot think and act conservatively on other issues like lowering taxes, cutting government spending, ending abortion, etc. But let’s be honest: the “proud” in GOProud is not about pride in opposing the death tax, or defending the right to bear arms; it’s about proudly embracing sinful homosexual behavior – and that is hardly a conservative value.

I challenge every thinking conservative to explain why we should jettison our nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage (which clearly rejects homosexual acts as immoral) for some new, secularized brand of “conservatism” that fails to conserve natural, normal, and noble sex within God-ordained marriage. Where does the expansion of “conservatism” stop? Would CPAC welcome “Republicans for Abortion” as a co-sponsor? How about “Conservatives For Higher Taxes”? We doubt it. So let’s stop the double-standard on one issue — homosexuality — that happens to be politically incorrect in this decadent age.

The American Family Association is also voicing its opposition:

Bryan Fischer is director of issues analysis for the American Family Association and host of the radio program Focal Point with Bryan Fischer. He says CPAC chairman David Keene and CPAC organizers have a serious problem on their hands.

"The bottom line is that homosexuality is not a conservative value," Fischer states emphatically. "There are any number of co-sponsoring organizations that I believe are going to have a real problem with the fact that they are giving such a prominent place to an organization which is such an active proponent of gay rights."

"And it's GOProud, they're identifying themselves with the Republican Party...and yet their legislative agenda is directly contrary to the platform of the Republican Party."

As I wrote last year, though there is significant overlap, those who attend the CPAC conference have distinctly different priorities from those who attend the strictly Religious Right conferences like the Values Voter Summit.

It'll be interesting to see how CPAC organizers managed to handle this controversy.  I'm guessing that GOProud will eventually "voluntarily" withdraw their sponsorship.

Back in September, Mike Heath of the Maine Family Policy Council suddenly announced that he was leaving the organization, right in the middle of the fight over marriage equality in the state.

Heath had been finding himself being pushed aside in the Religious Right's activism and mobilization efforts, presumably because of the rabidly anti-gay insanity he'd been spreading, as the Yes on 1 side worked to portray itself as tolerant and mainstream.

Heath then all but disappeared from the scene ... but now that Yes on 1 has been victorious in Maine, Tip-Q points out that he has popped up on Peter LaBarbera's Americans for Truth website declaring that gays are sick and calling for reinstatement of Maine's anti-sodomy laws:

Homosexuality has absolutely nothing to do with marriage. Homosexuality is a sickness. It’s a sin.

We need to stop putting up with it. There is nothing civil about hiding the truth from those we love. And the truth about sex outside of marriage is that it hurts, it’s bad for us. We need to avoid it.

We need to choose life over sex. Sex is for life … it creates life. Sex and life must be connected in our thinking. We come together sexually in the context of marriage to celebrate creation, the creation of a unique individual human life. It is perilous to disconnect sex from creation. It is even more perilous to pretend that pleasurable sex should be associated with acts unspeakable.

In the interest of protecting and affirming all of Maine’s people, especially our children and grandchildren, we must repeal domestic partnership laws that provide benefits on the basis of homosexuality, we must de-fund the so-called “civil rights teams” [pro-homosexual student groups] and remove “sexual orientation and gender identity” from the Maine Human Rights Act and the Maine Civil Rights Act. It would also be prudent to reinstate Maine’s anti-sodomy law that was quietly removed from our criminal code in the late 1970s.