Archive for the 'Homosexual Agenda' Category

Dec 16 2011

Romney Shows his Pro-‘Gay’ Colors, LaBarbera Says ‘Pro-Family’ Supporters of Romney Owe America an Apology

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney is not making any "apologies" for his embrace of government-backed "rights" based on homosexuality.

Release

December 16, 2011

Republicans For Family Values blog

www.rffv.net

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: peterlabarbera@comcast.net

CHICAGO–Peter LaBarbera, founder of Republicans For Family Values blog (www.rffv.net), issued the following response to GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s increasingly bold defense of homosexual “rights”:

I Tweeted the following in light of Romney’s bold embrace of homosexuality-based “rights” — voiced in last night’s FOX debate and previously to the Des Moines Register editorial board:

“Every pro-family leader or group that said they opposed the Homosexual Lobby (and raised $$ on that) — yet supported Romney — now owes us an apology.”

If Romney wins the Republican nomination, it will be a huge blow to the pro-family movement and our efforts to stop the normalization of sexual perversion. Romney personifies the failure of the current “marriage-only” approach toward resisting “same-sex marriage” – i.e., the idea that homosexuality is not the issue, but only “defending marriage.” Here is the supposed GOP standard-bearer saying that he has stood tall for real marriage (a fib, according to Mass Resistance writer Amy Contrada, author of “Mitt Romey’s Deception”) — and yet, like some soulless post-modern, he proudly embraces legal “rights” based on a Crime Against Nature that once dared not speak its name. (And did I mention that Romney flouts his own Mormon religion?)

According to Contrada’s well-researched book, Romney – who just reiterated his support for open homosexuals in the military:

  • Supported homosexual “domestic partnership” laws in MA;
  • Issued pro-“Gay Youth Pride” proclamations as Massachusetts governor and fully supported his own “Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth”;
  • Refused to sign the 2002 proposed Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage ballot referendum for a constitutional marriage amendment (he thought it was too extreme because it excluded “civil unions”); and
  • Bragged in 1994 Senatorial campaign debate that he would do more to mainstream homosexual rights than Ted Kennedy.

Is (was) our “pro-family” fight against homosexual activism the defense of God’s timeless Truth or merely a money-making charade? Some Christians and conservative leaders either have been fooled by Romney, or bought into the thinking of “establishment” Republican VIPs (e.g., Ann Coulter) who say Only Mitt Can Win. I don’t believe that for a minute, but now those who’ve spent years or even decades fighting this issue must ask: do we WANT Romney to win?

Romney has made the stakes crystal clear: Will the GOP join the Democrats in becoming officially PRO-homosexual behavior, which is to say, Pro-Sexual Sin?

Being against “gay marriage” (in name only) while campaigning to legitimize state-supported legal “rights” for an unnatural and unhealthy lifestyle condemned by God (and shown to be changeable through Christ) is NOT a “pro-family” position.

_________________

Republicans For Family Values blog is dedicated to defending traditional family values and the life of the unborn, in the GOP and the wider culture. For identification purposes only, RFFV founder Peter LaBarbera is also president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality.

Comments Off on Romney Shows his Pro-‘Gay’ Colors, LaBarbera Says ‘Pro-Family’ Supporters of Romney Owe America an Apology

Oct 09 2010

Elizabeth Hasselbeck Slams Christine O’Donnell, Compares Tea Party Activists to Bedbugs

Elizabeth Hasselbeck, the resident right-winger on ABC’s The View, slams Delaware GOP Senate (and Tea Party) candidate Christine O’Donnell — and then the entire Tea Party movement as being “like bedbugs.” Hasselbeck — who is weak on abortion and supports homosexual “marriage” — gets her facts wrong on defeated Sen. Mike Castle when she calls him a “strong conservative.” (Castle has a measly 52 percent lifetime scorecard average with the American Conservative Union.) The View needs a real conservative woman to join Hasselbeck, who more and more is acting like an Establishment Republican who just doesn’t get it. — Peter LaBarbera, www.RepublicansForFamilyValues.com:

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avRboRCGqqo]

Comments Off on Elizabeth Hasselbeck Slams Christine O’Donnell, Compares Tea Party Activists to Bedbugs

Oct 02 2010

Sen. Brady Should Just Have Said ‘No’ to ‘Gay Pride Parade’ Question

I wish Sen. Bill Brady (GOP candidate for Governor in Illinois) had just said “No” when asked by a Chicago TV reporter if he would march in a “gay pride” parade. There’s right and there’s wrong; politicians need to stop riding the fence on moral issues. — Peter LaBarbera, www.republicansforfamilyvalues.com

Go to 15:50 here:

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ4q5s-Ui-U]

Comments Off on Sen. Brady Should Just Have Said ‘No’ to ‘Gay Pride Parade’ Question

Sep 14 2010

Will Past Pro-‘Gay Marriage’ Video Hurt Wisconsin GOP Congressional Candidate Sean Duffy?

Will MTV ‘Real World’ Star Turned Politician Compromise on Homosexuality?

WARNING: OFFENSIVE IMAGES AND DESCRIPTIONS

Sean Duffy appeared in a 2003 movie, 'The Wedding Video,' which promotes "gay marriage" and includes some crass scenes. In this one, someone drew lewd graffiti and images on the car of the homosexual partner of 'Wedding Video' protagonist Norm Korpi. In the movie, Korpi is "engaged" unknowingly to a male homosexual porn star. The pink text at top is from a video critical of Duffy's role in the movie, created by Duffy's primary opponent, Dan Mielke.

By Peter LaBarbera, www.rffv.net

Normally preparing to write a story about a congressional race — especially a Republican primary contest in northern Wisconsin — does not require watching a pro-homosexual “marriage” mockumentary featuring MTV “reality” stars, and created by the founder of “Gay Entertainment Television.”

Yet that is what I found myself doing for this story about the 7th Congressional primary race in Wisconsin between Republicans Sean Duffy and Dan Mielke. The two are vying to replace retiring Rep. David Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most powerful Democrats on Capitol Hill. Wisconsin’s primary is today, Sept. 14, 2010. 

Mielke, an organic farmer, is making his second run at Congress after losing 61-39 to Obey in 2008. He has made an issue out of Duffy’s role in the 2003 film The Wedding Video, by homosexual artist Norman Korpi. Both Duffy (Real World: Boston) and Korpi were cast members of MTV’s Real World — a “reality” TV show in which young people chosen from across the country are thrown together to live as housemates with cameras running. Duffy’s wife Rachel (formerly Rachel Campos) was also a star on Real World: San Francisco, and is a friend of Korpi, who introduced her to her future husband. Sean and Rachel Duffy now have six kids.

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Will Past Pro-‘Gay Marriage’ Video Hurt Wisconsin GOP Congressional Candidate Sean Duffy?

Jun 08 2010

Why I Will Not Vote for Mark Kirk

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) has a strong pro-homosexual voting record, and voted against a ban on partial-birth abortion, among other anti-life votes.

By Laurie Higgins

With all the recent bad press about Mark Kirk’s prevaricating about his military record and his weaselly responses when confronted by the media about his prevarications, multiple people have made the argument that as bad as he is, it’s better to have a Republican elected than a Democrat. In the past I shared that view.  I have never voted for a third-party candidate or refused to vote—until now.  I have always been firmly committed to voting for the Republican candidate even if I had to hold my nose while voting—until now. Is there a limit to how bad a Republican candidate can get before Republicans will stand on principle? I’m beginning to think that Republicans have a limitless capacity for capitulation.

This is my thinking:

I think that it will be easier for a good Republican candidate to unseat Alexi Giannoulias in six years than it will be for a good Republican to unseat a semi-skillful incumbent like Mark Kirk. If Kirk gets in office, I fear we’ll have him for decades. I don’t think that’s the case with Giannoulias. The loss of the Senate seat to Giannoulias would provide Illinois Republicans six years to find a truly worthy Republican candidate. No matter which position Republicans take, it’s a crapshoot. We’re all speculating. Giannoulias could be an effective senator and, therefore, very difficult to unseat. Or he could be incompetent and, therefore, easy to unseat. With Kirk, we know we’re getting a skillful and experienced legislator who will be difficult to unseat.

Marc Ambinder, political editor of The Atlantic, writes this about the prospect of a Kirk win:

If Kirk wins the seat, he’s instantaneously the biggest name in the GOP.  The seat, you’ll remember, was Barack Obama’s seat. Kirk would be bigger than Massachusetts’ lion killer Scott Brown, bigger than the presidential candidates for a while, and he can be a kingmaker.

He’ll have a huge donor list, he’ll own Obama’s seat, and then he’s faced with a choice. Does he moderate himself truly, work in a bipartisan way and be a leader in the Senate.  Or, does he go with immediate ego gratification and position himself to be on the vice presidential short list for 2012? If Kirk doesn’t want to run again in 2016, he can bank on the fact that he’ll either be on the veep short-list then, or he’ll be a bona fide presidential contender in his own right.(http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/05/mark-kirk-the-next-scott-brown/56598/)

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Why I Will Not Vote for Mark Kirk

Jan 19 2010

Mark Kirk’s Clintonesque ‘Gay’ Denial — and His Radically Pro-Homosexual and Pro-Abortion Voting Record

Mark Kirk has a radical pro-abortion and pro-homosexual-agenda voting record, so most conservatives are not enthused about him becoming the next U.S. Senator from Illinois.

Dear RFFV Readers,

We’re back! With this post by my friend Laurie Higgins, Republicans for Family Values (www.rffv.org) is reactivating after a long silence — just in time for primary elections. The case of Congressman Mark Kirk running as a Republican for U.S. Senate in Illinois is a troubling one: here’s a fellow who voted AGAINST banning partial-birth abortion — and then rationalized the vote to party VIPs and activists as one necessitated by his liberal district (suburbs north of Chicago).

I don’t know which is more pathetic: Kirk’s pandering to pro-abortion feminists, leading him to miss an opportunity to criminalize de facto infanticide; or his sorry attempt to justify it politically. I realize most pseudo-compassionate left-wingers are heartless when it comes to the defenseless unborn, but is there really any congressional district so liberal that it necessitates protecting the gruesome practice of piercing the skull of a late-term unborn baby fully capable of living outside the womb so as to end its (inconvenient) life? Shame on you, Mark!

On the “gay” front, Mr. “Real Integrity” (a Kirk radio ad extols him as a “leader with real integrity”) is one of the most pro-homosexual-agenda of all the Republican legislators on Capitol Hill. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s most powerful homosexual lobby group, Kirk has the following rankings for the last three Congresses (voting with HRC’s misguided agenda) : 85%, 575 and 88% in the 110th, 109th and 108th Congresses, respectively.

In contrast, fellow Illinois Congressman Peter Roskam, also a Republican, has an HRC ranking of zero percent in the 110th Congress (his debut term).

This may explain why radical homosexual “outers” like Mike Rogers are in no hurry to talk about Kirk’s sexual proclivities, since they focus more on secretly homosexual Republicans who have a strong “pro-family” voting record. Of course, as Higgins writes, this would influence a “Senator Kirk” to continue voting pro-homosexual while the “gay” pressure ratchets up for him to reverse his few pro-family votes on the issue as his profile grows in Washington.

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Mark Kirk’s Clintonesque ‘Gay’ Denial — and His Radically Pro-Homosexual and Pro-Abortion Voting Record

Nov 03 2008

Obama Is Radically Pro-Homosexual and Radically Pro-Abortion-on-Demand – and Christians Voters Should Care

obama_planned_parenthood.jpg Barack Obama is a charlatan on abortion. He has pledged to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would increase the number of abortions across the country by overturning pro-life reforms. Click HERE to watch Obama’s 2007 speech at Planned Parenthood.

Republicans For Family Values  — News Release
www.rffv.org

November 3, 2008; contact: Peter LaBarbera: rffv@comcast.net

CHICAGO – Peter LaBarbera, founder of Republicans For Family Values (RFFV), said Barack Obama’s ideological devotion to both the homosexual and abortion agendas should weigh more heavily than non-moral issues as committed Christians weigh their vote tomorrow.

RFFV has published an essay, “Obama is FOR Gay Marriage even as He’s Against it,” to illustrate the Democratic candidate’s double-speak on “same-sex marriage.” Obama has promised homosexual activists that he would work to fully repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996. This issue has been largely ignored by the media, and John McCain has given Obama a pass on it.

“The Obama spin machine has done a con job on evangelicals and Catholics,” LaBarbera said. “Obama courts Christians by saying he supports traditional marriage. Meanwhile, he does everything he can to support the homosexual ‘marriage’ agenda – including his promise to “gay” activists to repeal DOMA.

“Similarly, Obama courts people of faith by pledging to ‘reduce the number of abortions.’ Yet he opposed an Illinois bill to give human rights to babies ‘born alive’ through botched abortions. And he blasted a Supreme Court ruling upholding a law banning heinous partial-birth abortions (infanticide).

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Obama Is Radically Pro-Homosexual and Radically Pro-Abortion-on-Demand – and Christians Voters Should Care

Oct 30 2008

Obama Is For ‘Gay Marriage’ even as He’s Against It

Democratic deception has worked: most ignorant about Obama’s radical anti-DOMA agenda

obama_time_cover.jpgBy Peter LaBarbera

As a social conservative, one of the most troubling aspects of this presidential campaign has been the media’s (and John McCain’s) failure to flesh out Barack Obama’s “audacious” doublespeak on the issue of same-sex “marriage.”

Here’s the question Obama was lucky enough to have never been asked in this campaign: What does it mean to say you support traditional marriage (one man, one woman) – when you do so much to advance the pro-“gay marriage” cause, including denouncing state marriage-protection amendments like Prop 8 in California as “discriminatory and divisive”?

Did you know that Obama has promised homosexual activists that he will work to fully repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act? DOMA was signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996 and protects states from being forced to recognize out-of-state “gay marriages.” It was passed overwhelmingly by the Senate, 85-14, with Sen. Biden joining 28 other Democrats in voting yes. How liberal is Obama’s anti-DOMA scheme? Hillary Clinton, a trusted gay ally, pledged to repeal only part of DOMA.

Neither McCain nor Gov. Palin has made an issue of Obama’s extreme anti-DOMA sop to the homosexual crowd even though they had a clear opening. (One 2007 Quinnipiac poll revealed that a homosexual group’s endorsement of a candidate would be a net electoral loser among voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.) The result is that Obama’s DOMA Destruction Plan never surfaced in the debates and barely in the major media.

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Obama Is For ‘Gay Marriage’ even as He’s Against It

Oct 23 2008

Theology Expert Says Obama ‘Grossly Distorts’ Scriptures to Support Homosexual Cause

Gagnon says Obama ‘audaciously’ twists Christ’s Sermon on the Mount to affirm homosexuality

audacity-of-hope.jpgA Special Report for Republicans For Family Values (www.rffv.org)

Note: RFFV has excerpted the text in question on pages 222-224 of Barack Obama’s book, The Adacity of Hope, here:  “Obama’s ‘Audacity of Hope’ Passage Downplays ‘Obscure Line in Romans’ Proscribing Homosexual Sex.” The “obscure line” in the New Testament Book of Romans to which Obama refers is evidently this (all links are to the New International Version of the Bible):

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:26-27)

________________________________

Barack Obama’s Disturbing Misreading of the Sermon on the Mount as Support for Homosexual Sex

by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D.
gagnon@pts.edu

October 23, 2008

Presidential candidate Barack Obama has written in The Audacity of Hope—a book that perhaps should have been entitled The Audacity of Portraying Myself Messianically as the Herald of Audacious Hope—that he is not “willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans [about homosexual practice] to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.”[1]  He repeated this line in a campaign appearance in Ohio this past March. He stated that if people find controversial his views on granting the full benefits of marriage to homosexual unions, minus only the name, “then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans.”[2]  These remarks by Obama represent a gross distortion of the witness of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures.

On Romans 1
First, they misrepresent the text in Romans 1:24-27 against all homosexual practice, a text that belongs to one of the two or three most important books in Scripture, a catalyst for frequent spiritual revivals for the past two millennia. Romans 1:24-27 depicts all homosexual practice as an “indecency” and moral “impurity” that does three things. First, it violates God’s male-female standard for valid sexual relations given in Genesis 1:27 (the text contains strong echoes to Genesis 1:26-27). Second, it violates the obvious evidence in the material structures of creation that male and female, not persons of the same sex, are each other’s sexual counterparts or complements (a particularly obvious example on the plane of human interrelationships of suppressing the truth about God and ourselves accessible in creation and nature). Third, it “dishonors” the sexual integrity of the participants who engage in such activity by imaging themselves as only half their own sex in their attempt to merge with an alleged complement of the same sex. The passage is no more “obscure” than Paul’s comments on idolatry in the preceding passage in Romans 1:19-23 or his comments regarding a case of adult-consensual man-stepmother incest at Corinth in 1 Corinthians 5—another instance of prohibited sexual intercourse between persons who are too much alike (here on a familial level, already of the same “flesh”).

On Scripture Generally
Second, Obama’s remarks misrepresent Scripture generally in that they suggest that Paul’s stance on homosexual practice is somehow an oddity within the pages of Scripture. The truth is that a person would be hard-pressed to come up with an example of consensual sexual relations that the witness of Scripture opposes more strongly, consistently, and absolutely. Paul’s remarks were certainly not isolated. Every law, narrative, proverb, poetry, metaphor, teaching, and exhortation in Scripture that has anything to do with sexual relations presupposes a male-female prerequisite. The creation texts in Genesis 1 and 2 both establish such a prerequisite. Genesis 1:27 integrates the creation of “male and female” as a sexual pair with being made in God’s image, suggesting that same-sex pairing would efface that part of the image of God stamped on the sexual self (as also would adultery and incest, the latter even of an adult-consensual sort). Genesis 2:21-24 portrays a male-female sexual bond as the re-merger of the two complementary sexual halves of an integrated sexual whole. In other words, the sexual “counterpart” or “complement” of a man is a woman (and vice versa), a being both “corresponding to him” and “opposite him” (as the Hebrew word kenegdo infers).

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Theology Expert Says Obama ‘Grossly Distorts’ Scriptures to Support Homosexual Cause

Oct 15 2008

Massive Mailing Contrasting Obama with McCain on Abortion, ‘Gay Marriage,’ and Islamic Jihad Hits Hundreds of Thousands of Clergy Nationwide

Rabbis, priests and pastors concur on homosexual unions and child sacrifice; Obama’s extreme social record exposed

News Release; October 13, 2008

CONTACT/INTERVIEWS: Print, Radio, Web: Lynne Campbell or Shauna Whitlock 630-848-0750
office@specialguests.com

Television: Todd Bauman 512-868-8395; todd@specialguests.com  OR
Jerry McGlothlin 212-699-2518; jerry@specialguests.com

Over 325,000 USA churches, synagogues get new publication, ‘The Judeo-Christian View’

Vista, CA (Monday, October 13) – Over 325,000 rabbis, priests and pastors in every Jewish and Christian congregation in America have received the inaugural issue of The Judeo-Christian View by U.S. mail, according to the publisher of the new periodical. The launch edition deals with the volatile issues of religion, presidential politics, same-sex unions and “child sacrifice.” Signed by dozens of clerics who concur that homosexuality and partial birth abortion – plus related policies of U.S. Senator Barack Obama – are at odds with the ancient Biblical faiths, the first edition also went online during Yom Kippur (www.thejudeo-christianview.com) and is heading to another 5 million U.S. clerics, theologians and religious laity via e-mail as part of an ambitious subscription strategy.

Signatories of the ecumenical epistle — rabbis, pastors and theologians themselves — urge congregational leaders to boldly pray, preach and teach “the Judeo-Christian view” on same-sex intercourse while conveying to their flocks where Senators Obama and John McCain stand on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that shields states from forced legal recognition of gay unions from other states, such as Massachusetts and California. The “multimedia journal of opinion”– including a graphic DVD “video sermon” for congregations which cites both Jewish and Christian Bible translations — reports that Obama favors full repeal of DOMA and supports same-sex unions, while McCain takes the opposite stand.

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on Massive Mailing Contrasting Obama with McCain on Abortion, ‘Gay Marriage,’ and Islamic Jihad Hits Hundreds of Thousands of Clergy Nationwide

Next »