Archive for August 8th, 2008

Root Cause of AIDS Being Ignored

Friday, August 8th, 2008

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality is calling on church and political leaders to confront the unhealthy lifestyle choices contributing to the majority of the country’s HIV infections.

The 17th International AIDS Conference will wrap up in Mexico City on Friday (August 8). In attendance is California mega-church pastor Rick Warren who says HIV-AIDS is a “global pandemic” that the church can help solve by “show[ing] compassion, kindness and the love of Christ.” However, Peter LaBarbera says while he commends the idea of a church-based effort to fight AIDS in Africa, he is troubled that many church and political leaders are afraid to take on the primary source of the AIDS problem in the United States.

“We know that homosexual behavior and homosexual promiscuity are linked to AIDS. A very obvious connection is brought out in the CDC statistics [see related video report], and yet nobody in any position of authority — and that would include the White House — seems to want to deal with taking action against the sources of spreading HIV here in the United States,” LaBarbera points out.

Original Link.

Campaigns Seek ‘Truth’ About Obama’s Birth

Friday, August 8th, 2008

Obama Birth Certificate Border

We have blogged about this before here and here.

Israel Insider is reporting that analysts working separately have determined the birth certificate posted on the Daily Kos website and later on Sen. Barack Obama’s “Fight the Smears” campaign website is fraudulent, and now two different actions have been launched to try and obtain the truth about the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee’s birth.

The Israel Insider report said the two analysts it interviewed both have been “able to independently discern the name ‘Maya Kassandra Soetoro’ from artifacts left behind in the process of forging a new fake document for Barack from an image of Maya’s original document.” Maya is Obama’s younger half-sister.

The report follows a posting from another researcher identified by the news publication as Techdude that the birth certificate is a forgery because it originally documented the birth of a woman in the 1970s.

Blogger Mitchell Langbert now has launched an online petition to the Federal Election Commission in which signers are asking the agency to “take responsibility to verify the eligibility of Mr. Barack H. Obama to be president of the United States.”

Wrote Langbert, “Mr. Obama has refused to produce a physical certified, stamped copy of his birth certificate. An electronically displayed imaged displayed by his official campaign website has alleged to have been a forgery. … We request that the FEC require Mr. Obama to authorize the FEC to obtain an official copy of his birth certificate.”

Ted Moran, who said he wished to be contacted at brotherbear@solomonsstables.org, said he also was launching a campaign to discern the truth about Obama’s birth certificate.

“I am looking for 50 brave men or women from 49 states and the District of Columbia to join me in suing the secretaries of state in our respective states to prevent them from posting the name Barak H. Obama on the November 2008 ballot until he presents incontrovertible proof that he is a … U.S. citizen,” he said. “The secretaries of state are the ones who by placing a person or initiative on the ballot certify that the candidates or initiatives meet the legal requirements to be on the ballot.

“The office of the president is simply too important to trust to someone other than a person whose loyalties are 100 percent American, and while it is impossible to read into the heart of a man or woman we do have the test our forefathers gave us. Which is this office is not to be entrusted to anyone but a natural U.S. citizen,” he said.

Multiple requests over a period of several days by WND to the Obama campaign for a comment or explanation of the birth certificate issue did not generate any response.

The Israel Insider said, “The revelation that [the birth certificate] of Obama’s own sister was evidently used to create the electronic forgery represents what supporters of this analysis claim is a ‘smoking gun’ that appears to implicate Sen. Obama directly. Hawaii law limits access to vital records to family members only, a fact which slowed down the ability of researchers to compare the purported Obama ‘birth certificate’ – which displayed from the start a peculiar provenance and inexplicable features – to genuine specimens. Therefore, it would seem that either Maya K. Soetoro-Ng (as she is now called) supplied the document or its image to half-brother Barack or his campaign, or Obama/his campaign used it without her permission.”

“The stakes couldn’t be higher. Even the Snopes anti-rumor site acknowledges that Obama’s constitutional fitness to be president depends solely on his being born in the United States, because his mother – not yet 19 at the time of his birth – would not have had a sufficient number of years as an adult citizen, according to the laws prevailing at the time, to pass on ‘natural born citizenship’ automatically,” the report said.

“There have been reports, so far unconfirmed, that Obama was born outside the country, either in Kenya, his presumed father’s native land, or in Canada. The fact that the Obama campaign has been touting as genuine a forgery since June 12 will likely increase pressure to not only account for the fake but produce a genuine paper birth certificate. Obama, in his book ‘Dreams from My Father,’ specifically mentioned having such a document in his possession, but it has not been submitted for public inspection or analysis if it in fact exists,” the report said.

The forensic computer investigators interviewed by the news publication concluded there are two obvious possibilities for the birth certificate image: A real certificate was scanned and digitally edited or a real certificate was scanned for the graphic layout, then blanked by soaking the document in solvent to remove the toner.

The certificate was published by the Daily Kos June 12 following initial reports questioning Obama’s place of birth. He’s stated he was born in Hawaii, but if that was not the case, his citizenship could be shaky, since his father was not a citizen and his mother was not old enough to pass along American citizenship automatically.

The issue originally was raised by Jim Geraghty, reporting on the Campaign Spot, a National Review blog. He cited the “unlikely” possibility that Obama’s 1961 birth was not within the U.S.

At the time, he wrote, “If Obama were born outside the United States, one could argue that he would not meet the legal definition of natural-born citizen … because U.S. law at the time of his birth required his natural-born parent (his mother) to have resided in the United States for 10 years, at least [f]ive of which had to be after the age of 16.'”

He then pointed out Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, was 18 when Obama was born “so she wouldn’t have met the requirement of five years after the age of 16.”

When the Daily Kos website posted an image that appeared to be Obama’s birth certificate, Geraghty announced he was satisfied.

The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., already has gone through the same type of challenge, and the U.S. Senate responded with a resolution in April declaring him to be a “‘natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”

The article declares “no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the office of president.”

McCain was challenged because he was born to two U.S. citizens in the Panama Canal Zone.

Original Link.

California Legislators Tell School Kids to Celebrate Homosexuality

Friday, August 8th, 2008

Only a year after banning all negative messages about homosexuality in public schools throughout the state, the California Legislature now is ordering school children to celebrate “gay” lifestyle choices.

“If signed into law, AB 2567 will mean an official day commemorating homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality in California government schools,” said Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families.

“This will harm children as young as kindergarten,” he said. “Every May 22, AB 2567 will positively portray to children homosexual experimentation, homosexual ‘marriages,’ sex-change operations, and anything else that’s ‘in the closet.’ Gov. Schwarzenegger should say no to this very inappropriate bill, which has nothing to do with academic excellences.”

He said the passage by lawmakers of AB 2567 will require all California public schools to “conduct suitable commemorative exercises” in honor of the anti-religious, sexual-anarchy agenda of Milk, the late San Francisco supervisor who was a homosexual activist.

The California Assembly approved the plan 43-26 and the Senate 22-13, with both votes along party lines of Democrats supporting the homosexual agenda.

The plan comes on the heels of last year’s school sexual indoctrination laws, Thomasson said. “When fully implemented, SB 777 and AB 394 will teach children in California government schools to support homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality via instructional materials, programs and activities, and school ‘safety’ guidelines,” he said. “In addition, the California State School Board this year implemented SB 71 requiring public schools that provide sex education to promote unmarried sexual activity with no restraints other than mutual consent.”

State lawmakers in California this week also voted to allow members of the Communist Party to not only rent school facilities for their meetings but also to teach in the state’s public schools. Republicans proposed banning terrorists from those activities, but majority Democrats defeated the amendments.

The “gay” Milk Day plan should spur parents into action, Thomasson said.

“AB 2567 will further motivate parents to remove their children from the immoral public school system,” he said. “We’re encouraging parents to visit RescueYourChild.org to learn how to save their children while they still can.

“With public schools becoming sexual indoctrination centers, homeschooling and church schools are no longer parental options, they’re parental imperatives,” he said.

“This is yet another example of the campaign to normalize homosexual behavior not just in schools, but in our culture,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute. “Young children will be forced to celebrate the life of a man whose claim to fame is his sexual orientation.”

“Parents should be outraged that California’s lawmakers want their children to spend a whole day celebrating homosexuality instead of studying important subjects like math or science,” stated Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Family Impact. “Every parent and student should call Governor Schwarzenegger and tell him to veto AB 2567.”

Original Link.

Foremost UK Gay Activist Admits there is No Gay Gene

Friday, August 8th, 2008

As we have been saying on this blog for years…

August 6, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – One of the untouchable dogmas of the homosexualist movement is the assertion of the existence of a “gay gene”, or a genetic marker that causes same-sex attraction. The assertion of a genetic factor in homosexual preference has never been demonstrated by scientists and now at least one prominent campaigner in the British homosexualist movement has admitted this fact.

Peter Tatchell, an Australian-born British homosexual activist who founded the “direct action” group OutRage! that specialises in media stunts such as disrupting Christian religious services, wrote on Spiked Online that he agrees with the scientific consensus that there is no such thing as a “gay gene.”

Contrary to the findings of some researchers who have tried to posit a purely genetic origin for same-sex attractions, Tatchell wrote, “Genes and hormones may predispose a person to one sexuality rather than another. But that’s all. Predisposition and determination are two different things.”

Homosexual activists have adopted the “gay gene” theory to bolster their assertion that any objection on moral grounds to homosexual activity is akin to objecting to left-handedness or skin colour. It has supported the accusation that Christians and others who object to the homosexual movement are racists and bigots.

Tatchell even went as far as to acknowledge the existence of some who have changed their “sexual orientation.” “If heterosexuality and homosexuality are, indeed, genetically predetermined… how do we explain bisexuality or people who, suddenly in mid-life, switch from heterosexuality to homosexuality (or vice versa)? We can’t.”

Sexuality, he wrote, is “far more ambiguous, blurred and overlapping than any theory of genetic causality can allow.”

“Examples of sexual flexibility… don’t square with genetic theories of rigid erotic predestination.”

Bill Muehlenberg, a Christian writer and philosophy lecturer, called Tatchell’s admission a rare and “refreshing” and “very revealing case of homosexual honesty.” Muehlenberg said that he has been “howled down” by homosexual lobbyists for years for saying the same things about putative homosexual determinism. Whoever is saying it, he wrote, the conclusion must be the debunking of the myth that homosexuals are “born that way” and cannot help, or change, their inclinations.

The “gay gene” theory has been used by gay activists “to deny choice, to make it appear that homosexuals cannot help it, and to argue that any criticism of the gay lifestyle is as silly as criticism of being left-handed or red-haired.”

“And this has been a deliberate strategy by homosexual activists. They have done a very good job to convince a gullible public that homosexuals are born that way and cannot change.”

Original Link.

Evangelicals in ‘la-la land’ Over Muslim Agreement

Friday, August 8th, 2008

Koran 47:36 says “Therefore do not falter or sue for peace when you have gained the upper hand.”

At the conclusion of a recent four-day conference at Yale University, more than 150 Christian and Muslim leaders from around the globe announced the first step of the “Common Word” exchange drafted last November. The Christian representatives included the heads of both the National Association of Evangelicals (Leith Anderson) and the World Evangelical Alliance (Geoff Tunnicliffe). A statement released at the conclusion of the conference explains that “the intention behind the Common Word is not to foist the theology of one religions upon another or to attempt conversion.”

According to a Reuters report, participants of the Yale gathering affirmed their support for freedom of religion and mutual respect. But Jan Markell, director of Olive Tree Ministries in Minnesota, has reservations about one particular aspect of the inter-faith agreement. Markell admits she is very skeptical about a pledge made by members of both faiths to spend one week per year sharing the “positive aspects” of the other’s faith.

“The mosques would talk about Christianity in a positive light. Christian churches would talk about Islam in a positive light,” explains Markell. “…I don’t believe there’s a mosque in America that’s going to say positive things about non-Muslims. And very sadly, I think they’re will be evangelical pulpits that once a year will get up and say now here are some positive things about Islam,” she laments.

Markell says the idea is “unrealistic, to put it mildly.” She comments that these “evangelical” leaders apparently do not know that many American mosques are the breeding ground for radicals who are calling for the destruction of America and its takeover by Islam.

Original Link.

California: Frontline of the Marriage Culture War

Friday, August 8th, 2008

Frank Pastore from KKLA in Los Angeles interviews Gary Bauer, president of American Values about the effort to redefine the marriage protection amendment on the fall ballot.

Pastore: The Attorney General of California, Jerry Brown, has decided that he wants to weigh with his opinion of the protection of marriage attempt that we have in California—that is going to be on the ballot in November. And he has chosen to redefine the measure on the ballot so that it will appear on the ballot not as we had signed it and passed it around—that, you know, “the State of California recognizes that marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” That is what we had basically signed. He now has weighed in and said, “You know, with the fact that the courts have passed it, we got all these gay marriages that have happened, we now are going to reword it to the following: Proposition 8 changes the California constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry.” Gary Bauer, you are a political operative. Is that going to have and impact on the turn out and perhaps the vote?

Bauer: It could very well have an impact and I suspect that is why the attorney general did what he did. He is trying to stack the deck. People get very confused when they go in to vote on these referenda, and now this referendum has been worded in a way that makes it sound like a right is being taken away from people. Of course, there is no such right. And certainly the Supreme Court of California can’t create a right over and above what the people and the elected officials of California are willing to do. Courts are not supposed to be making law. They are supposed to be interpreting the law that has already been made. I’ll guarantee you that—the people who drafted the California constitution—it never crossed their mind that they were writing a Constitution that would redefine marriage so that men could marry men.

Pastore: Now Attorney General Jerry Brown in California has basically on his own, and of course he wants to run for governor again, he’s weighed in and instead of “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California” he’s changed that to Proposition 8 “changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry.” Then it goes on … over the next few years potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling tens of millions of dollars to state and local governments, etc.—meaning it is going to cost us tens of millions of dollars and we are eliminating a right.

It is so bad and thank goodness the Protect Marriage group is filing a quick lawsuit to try to block this from going in…. This is indicative of the culture war that you have been fighting nearly all your life.

Bauer: It really is. I’ll tell you something. I know Jerry Brown. I’ve been in debates with him, even one in which he was on my side in the question of our trade with China. But Brown is the kind of guy that always likes to think of himself as a progressive. He’s for clean government. He’s for fairness for everybody. He’s for making sure the system doesn’t discriminate, etc. Yet when we get into an issue this basic where the voters of California have already voted once on this question he is not above changing the rules, trying to stack the deck in order to confuse the electorate and make sure his side wins the battle on Election Day.

I think it’s outrageous. I think the attorney general out to be ashamed of himself.

Frank Pastore is host of “The Frank Pastore Show,” recognized by the National Religious Broadcasters as Talk Show Host of the Year in 2006. His program is heard on KKLA in Los Angeles 4-7 p.m. Monday through Friday. Contact Frank at Frank@kkla.com.

Original Link.