By Allie Martin
February 27, 2006
(AgapePress) - Terrorists in Gaza have threatened to blow up the building of the only Bible distribution center in the Palestinian-controlled area by the end of the month. Last week terrorists distributed flyers warning the building's landlord to evict the Bible Society by February 28 or they would blow up the property.
Al Janssen, Chairman of the Board for Open Doors USA, is an expert on the Middle East. He says the Bible Society plays a vital role in the region, particularly since it is "the only place in Gaza where anybody can get a Bible."
There are 1.3 million Muslims and only 2,000 Christians in the region the Bible Society Center serves, Janssen points out. "If anybody wants a Bible, that's the only place they can go. There's also a little Bible church, Gaza Baptist Church, that's very closely tied to that Bible Society. We would like people to be praying for that -- that this ministry of the church and the Bible Society will continue and that it will continue to be a light in the midst of the darkness in Gaza."
Earlier this month, terrorists detonated a bomb at the Bible Society Center, causing minor damage. However, the Open Doors USA spokesman says the Society has been forced to close for the time being. Meanwhile, he notes, Open Doors has been calling on Palestinian officials to ensure that the terrorists' violent plans do not come to fruition.
"We're working through back channels to basically say to Hamas, 'Now that you've been elected, this is something you need to be responsible for,'" Janssen notes. "Now, we don't believe that Hamas is behind this threat; there are a lot of little fringe groups in there as well. But we do believe that Hamas can make sure this doesn't happen."
Open Doors Advocates for Gaza Bible Distributor Facing Terrorist Threat
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Libraries' Policy Falls Short of Protecting Children
By Jim Brown
February 27, 2006
(AgapePress) - A decision by libraries in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, regarding access to controversial children's books is being cast by some concerned citizens as merely a cosmetic move to appease critics of the books. The city's Library Commission voted 12 to 1 to move children's books that deal with sensitive topics to a separate area of the libraries.
Libraries in the Oklahoma City-County system will now have a "Parenting Collection," where they will keep books on alternative lifestyles, sex, and drug use. However, Lynn Rahman of the group Oklahomans for School Accountability believes more could be done to protect children from objectionable material.
Rahman says the Commission members are "trying to allay fears without really making an actual move." A bigger and more effective step for the library system officials to take would be to actually move the books from the children's section, she insists, "not just to a higher shelf, because children can take books down and they can leave them laying around on tables and everywhere else, and a parent could simply do the same thing."
Among the 37 children's books in the Parenting Collection is King and King, an illustrated storybook featuring two princes who get married and share a kiss at the story's end. Other books in the collection address many sensitive topics, including homosexuality and premarital sex.
Rahman feels the Library Commission's policy of moving the controversial books to higher shelves does not adequately protect children since anyone who uses the book in the library could easily leave it unshelved and it would "just be lying there anyway, in the same section."
Besides, the Oklahomans for School Accountability spokeswoman notes, parents are wrong to think the problem of inappropriate materials is isolated to public libraries. "The school library has just as many bad books, if not more, than the public library," she contends.
"So [whether] in the public schools or public school libraries," Rahman advises parents, "they really need to keep an eye on what their children grab a hold of." She believes library books containing sexually explicit and profane content are making their way into schools much faster than they are being removed.
Libraries' 'Parenting Collection' Policy Falls Short of Protecting Children, Group Contends
February 27, 2006
(AgapePress) - A decision by libraries in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, regarding access to controversial children's books is being cast by some concerned citizens as merely a cosmetic move to appease critics of the books. The city's Library Commission voted 12 to 1 to move children's books that deal with sensitive topics to a separate area of the libraries.
Libraries in the Oklahoma City-County system will now have a "Parenting Collection," where they will keep books on alternative lifestyles, sex, and drug use. However, Lynn Rahman of the group Oklahomans for School Accountability believes more could be done to protect children from objectionable material.
Rahman says the Commission members are "trying to allay fears without really making an actual move." A bigger and more effective step for the library system officials to take would be to actually move the books from the children's section, she insists, "not just to a higher shelf, because children can take books down and they can leave them laying around on tables and everywhere else, and a parent could simply do the same thing."
Among the 37 children's books in the Parenting Collection is King and King, an illustrated storybook featuring two princes who get married and share a kiss at the story's end. Other books in the collection address many sensitive topics, including homosexuality and premarital sex.
Rahman feels the Library Commission's policy of moving the controversial books to higher shelves does not adequately protect children since anyone who uses the book in the library could easily leave it unshelved and it would "just be lying there anyway, in the same section."
Besides, the Oklahomans for School Accountability spokeswoman notes, parents are wrong to think the problem of inappropriate materials is isolated to public libraries. "The school library has just as many bad books, if not more, than the public library," she contends.
"So [whether] in the public schools or public school libraries," Rahman advises parents, "they really need to keep an eye on what their children grab a hold of." She believes library books containing sexually explicit and profane content are making their way into schools much faster than they are being removed.
Libraries' 'Parenting Collection' Policy Falls Short of Protecting Children, Group Contends
Second Annual Day of Truth Hailed as Celebration of Free Expression
By Jim Brown
February 27, 2006
(AgapePress) - Christian students are being encouraged to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda in public schools by celebrating the second annual "Day of Truth."
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) established the observance in response to the national "Day of Silence," an event sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to protest discrimination and harassment experienced by homosexuals.
Students will be observing the Day of Truth on Thursday, April 27, by wearing T-shirts and passing out cards expressing an opposing viewpoint on homosexuality. ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb says the event is "an opportunity for students to exercise their First Amendment rights in an appropriate way and get the message out about a Christian view of truth."
Students taking part in the pro-family event will be handing out cards that state: "I am speaking the truth to break the silence. Silence isn't freedom; it's a constraint. Truth tolerates open discussion, because the truth emerges when healthy discourse is allowed. By proclaiming the truth in love, hurts will be halted, hearts will be healed, and lives will be saved."
The Day of Truth represents "an important moment in American history," McCaleb contends. "This thing has gotten a lot of traction in the couple years that we've been working on it," he says. "It really does provide an opportunity for Christians to speak out, to speak the truth in love, and I think that's important.
"We lawyers can do a lot to change the law," the ADF spokesman continues, "but if Christians don't come out and speak and engage society, then all the lawyers in the world are kind of useless. You need the folks to get out there and speak and engage the culture."
Last year, according to ADF's statistics, more than 1,100 students from at least 350 schools nationwide took part in Day of Truth activities. McCaleb says the group hopes to see even more Christian young people joining in on April 27 this year to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda in public schools by breaking the silence and speaking the truth about that lifestyle.
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/2/272006c.asp
February 27, 2006
(AgapePress) - Christian students are being encouraged to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda in public schools by celebrating the second annual "Day of Truth."
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) established the observance in response to the national "Day of Silence," an event sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to protest discrimination and harassment experienced by homosexuals.
Students will be observing the Day of Truth on Thursday, April 27, by wearing T-shirts and passing out cards expressing an opposing viewpoint on homosexuality. ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb says the event is "an opportunity for students to exercise their First Amendment rights in an appropriate way and get the message out about a Christian view of truth."
Students taking part in the pro-family event will be handing out cards that state: "I am speaking the truth to break the silence. Silence isn't freedom; it's a constraint. Truth tolerates open discussion, because the truth emerges when healthy discourse is allowed. By proclaiming the truth in love, hurts will be halted, hearts will be healed, and lives will be saved."
The Day of Truth represents "an important moment in American history," McCaleb contends. "This thing has gotten a lot of traction in the couple years that we've been working on it," he says. "It really does provide an opportunity for Christians to speak out, to speak the truth in love, and I think that's important.
"We lawyers can do a lot to change the law," the ADF spokesman continues, "but if Christians don't come out and speak and engage society, then all the lawyers in the world are kind of useless. You need the folks to get out there and speak and engage the culture."
Last year, according to ADF's statistics, more than 1,100 students from at least 350 schools nationwide took part in Day of Truth activities. McCaleb says the group hopes to see even more Christian young people joining in on April 27 this year to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda in public schools by breaking the silence and speaking the truth about that lifestyle.
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/2/272006c.asp
Friday, February 24, 2006
Grad student booted for sharing her faith outside of work hours
Because she shared her faith with co-workers during lunch breaks and after work hours -- and because she refused to sign a document agreeing not to do that -- a Christian woman in California has been terminated from her internship with the Department of Children and Family Services and threatened with expulsion from a graduate program at Cal State-Long Beach.
The document the school had asked Jacqueline Escobar to sign also included a statement admitting she had "an inability to separate her religious beliefs from her role" as an intern.
Consequently, Escobar's legal representative -- the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) -- filed a federal lawsuit on her behalf against the DCFS. Escobar, according to a press release from PJI, demonstrated outstanding academic and work performance but "came under scrutiny" for sharing her faith while an intern at the DCFS.
That state agency, says PJI president Brad Dacus, "has no business telling an intern that she cannot share her faith during non-working hours."
The attorney says he is confident a federal court will "cut off [the] muzzle" that the agency has used to silence his client. [Jody Brown]
News from Agape Press
The document the school had asked Jacqueline Escobar to sign also included a statement admitting she had "an inability to separate her religious beliefs from her role" as an intern.
Consequently, Escobar's legal representative -- the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) -- filed a federal lawsuit on her behalf against the DCFS. Escobar, according to a press release from PJI, demonstrated outstanding academic and work performance but "came under scrutiny" for sharing her faith while an intern at the DCFS.
That state agency, says PJI president Brad Dacus, "has no business telling an intern that she cannot share her faith during non-working hours."
The attorney says he is confident a federal court will "cut off [the] muzzle" that the agency has used to silence his client. [Jody Brown]
News from Agape Press
Chaplain Rebels at Prayer Censorship, Then Removed From Assignment
By Chad Groening
February 23, 2006
(AgapePress) - Another military chaplain has gotten into trouble with his superiors because he has refused to go along with orders not to pray in the name of Jesus.
Captain Jonathan Stertzbach is an Army chaplain assigned to the 10th Mountain Division in Iraq. He was recently removed from his chapel after he commented to the Washington Times about how chaplains of all faiths are being told to offer up only non-sectarian prayers.
Chaplain Stertzbach is now under orders not to talk to the media -- but his representative, Dr. Billy Baugham of the International Conference of Evangelical Chaplain Endorsers, is under no such restrictions. According to Baugham, Stertzbach was upset at having a prayer censored.
"He was told to write out his prayer," Baugham explains, "and when they saw 'In Jesus' name. Amen,' his brigade chaplain struck through it and said, 'You're going to have to change it.'"
Baugham says Stertzbach's response was that he cannot pray a prayer unless he uses Jesus' name. The chaplain, adds Baugham, said: "My local church is an independent Baptist church, and that's the way we pray."
The retired Army chaplain adamantly notes that military regulations forbid restrictions on chaplains' prayers. "There are Department of Defense instructions which state that a chaplain is to adhere to the faith group of his tenets before they do the military," Baugham says. "[A chaplain] has no authority to pray any other prayer other than what his sending agency or his sending church allows him to pray."
In short, says Baugham, a chaplain's duty is to represent his faith group. "It's not to represent another faith group, it's not to represent the prayers of the United States government or the United States Army," he says. "He can only speak for his endorsing agency, be that what it may be."
Baugham indicates he is working with North Carolina Congressman Walter Jones and others to get Chaplain Stertzbach reinstated to his chapel.
Chaplain Rebels at Prayer Censorship, Then Removed From Assignment
February 23, 2006
(AgapePress) - Another military chaplain has gotten into trouble with his superiors because he has refused to go along with orders not to pray in the name of Jesus.
Captain Jonathan Stertzbach is an Army chaplain assigned to the 10th Mountain Division in Iraq. He was recently removed from his chapel after he commented to the Washington Times about how chaplains of all faiths are being told to offer up only non-sectarian prayers.
Chaplain Stertzbach is now under orders not to talk to the media -- but his representative, Dr. Billy Baugham of the International Conference of Evangelical Chaplain Endorsers, is under no such restrictions. According to Baugham, Stertzbach was upset at having a prayer censored.
"He was told to write out his prayer," Baugham explains, "and when they saw 'In Jesus' name. Amen,' his brigade chaplain struck through it and said, 'You're going to have to change it.'"
Baugham says Stertzbach's response was that he cannot pray a prayer unless he uses Jesus' name. The chaplain, adds Baugham, said: "My local church is an independent Baptist church, and that's the way we pray."
The retired Army chaplain adamantly notes that military regulations forbid restrictions on chaplains' prayers. "There are Department of Defense instructions which state that a chaplain is to adhere to the faith group of his tenets before they do the military," Baugham says. "[A chaplain] has no authority to pray any other prayer other than what his sending agency or his sending church allows him to pray."
In short, says Baugham, a chaplain's duty is to represent his faith group. "It's not to represent another faith group, it's not to represent the prayers of the United States government or the United States Army," he says. "He can only speak for his endorsing agency, be that what it may be."
Baugham indicates he is working with North Carolina Congressman Walter Jones and others to get Chaplain Stertzbach reinstated to his chapel.
Chaplain Rebels at Prayer Censorship, Then Removed From Assignment
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Biblical preaching could be outlawed unless Christians become more politically active
British Pol Advises American Christians to Get Involved in Politics
By Allie Martin
February 22, 2006
(AgapePress) - A member of the British House of Lords has told the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) convention in Dallas that biblical preaching could be outlawed unless Christians become more politically active.
Recently the British Parliament nearly passed legislation that would have amended that nation's Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and outlawed incitement to religious hatred. The measure lost by a single vote -- the vote of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who left early, confident that the bill would pass without him.
John Taylor, a member of the House of Lords, spoke at this week's NRB gathering in Texas. Taylor said passage of the bill could have led to pastors being arrested for so-called "hate speech." Unless Christians take action, says Taylor, clergy in his country -- as well as in the United States -- could fall victim to such statutes, should they be enacted.
"There's an old saying that things won't change until people change," Taylor says. "So we can moan about these [political] institutions and so forth, or we can basically get in there. We are called to be salt and light -- so why don't we take over the Senate and Congress and so forth?"
According to Taylor, Christians in Britain have virtually abandoned politics. He says there is a "kind of lethargy" in Christians that often causes them to retreat from the political arena, saying "Well, that's politics; we don't get involved in politics." But try telling that to Muslims, he adds.
"There are Muslim Members of Parliament who are sponsored by mosques. They are there to preach Islam," he says. "In the House of Lords, there's a room where you can pray to Mecca -- but there's no room where you can pray to Christ."
Taylor calls it a "miracle" that the prime minister was absent for the final vote. Earlier, members of Parliament had voted 288-278 to back the amendment to the bill.
A BBC report quotes one member of Parliament as saying "the government just failed to understand that they can't take liberties with freedom of expression. This [vote] has showed ... that we will stand up for freedom of expression." That report notes this was only the second defeat of government-backed legislation in almost ten years.
News from Agape Press
By Allie Martin
February 22, 2006
(AgapePress) - A member of the British House of Lords has told the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) convention in Dallas that biblical preaching could be outlawed unless Christians become more politically active.
Recently the British Parliament nearly passed legislation that would have amended that nation's Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and outlawed incitement to religious hatred. The measure lost by a single vote -- the vote of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who left early, confident that the bill would pass without him.
John Taylor, a member of the House of Lords, spoke at this week's NRB gathering in Texas. Taylor said passage of the bill could have led to pastors being arrested for so-called "hate speech." Unless Christians take action, says Taylor, clergy in his country -- as well as in the United States -- could fall victim to such statutes, should they be enacted.
"There's an old saying that things won't change until people change," Taylor says. "So we can moan about these [political] institutions and so forth, or we can basically get in there. We are called to be salt and light -- so why don't we take over the Senate and Congress and so forth?"
According to Taylor, Christians in Britain have virtually abandoned politics. He says there is a "kind of lethargy" in Christians that often causes them to retreat from the political arena, saying "Well, that's politics; we don't get involved in politics." But try telling that to Muslims, he adds.
"There are Muslim Members of Parliament who are sponsored by mosques. They are there to preach Islam," he says. "In the House of Lords, there's a room where you can pray to Mecca -- but there's no room where you can pray to Christ."
Taylor calls it a "miracle" that the prime minister was absent for the final vote. Earlier, members of Parliament had voted 288-278 to back the amendment to the bill.
A BBC report quotes one member of Parliament as saying "the government just failed to understand that they can't take liberties with freedom of expression. This [vote] has showed ... that we will stand up for freedom of expression." That report notes this was only the second defeat of government-backed legislation in almost ten years.
News from Agape Press
New Disease Strains Heighten Risks of Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle
By Mary Rettig
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - Culture and Family Institute (CFI) director Bob Knight says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has discovered some new reasons why homosexual men need to stop their destructive and potentially deadly lifestyle.
The CDC recently reported that a rare strain of chlamydia called LGV (lymphogranuloma venereum) in the U.S. have been HIV-infected men who have sex with other men. was found in several dozen U.S. patients. Public health officials say this strain of the sexually transmitted disease is extremely hard to diagnose and poses a serious health threat, as it compromises a person's immune system and makes the infected person even more susceptible to other kinds of infections.
This is one reason CDC researchers are particularly concerned about the rising incidence of LGV, Knight points out. "They're worried because, when you have an infection like that, it affects your immune system and makes you more prone to get other diseases such as HIV infection, which can lead to AIDS," he explains.
According to the pro-family advocate, LGV is just one of those sexually transmitted diseases prevalent among homosexual men on which CDC investigators are reporting some alarming data. He notes, "They've also found other diseases that are concentrated among male homosexuals -- a new strain of syphilis, and a strain of tuberculosis that is drug resistant."
"Clearly," Knight contends, "the ongoing promiscuity that characterizes the young homosexual male population is contributing to the spread of illnesses -- perhaps even strains that we hadn't seen before."
Knight says the homosexual community needs to be concerned about LGV, just as public health officials are. And homosexual men cannot rely on condom use to protect them from the disease, he warns, because condoms have proven very ineffective against the disease.
According to CDC statistics, the majority of patients diagnosed with LGV proctitis (anal inflammation due to lymphogranuloma venereum infection) in the U.S. have been HIV-infected men who have sex with other men. Unlike routine cases of chlamydia, LGV can cause chronic gastrointestinal distress, including inflammation and bleeding of the rectum and colon.
New Disease Strains Heighten Risks of Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - Culture and Family Institute (CFI) director Bob Knight says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has discovered some new reasons why homosexual men need to stop their destructive and potentially deadly lifestyle.
The CDC recently reported that a rare strain of chlamydia called LGV (lymphogranuloma venereum) in the U.S. have been HIV-infected men who have sex with other men. was found in several dozen U.S. patients. Public health officials say this strain of the sexually transmitted disease is extremely hard to diagnose and poses a serious health threat, as it compromises a person's immune system and makes the infected person even more susceptible to other kinds of infections.
This is one reason CDC researchers are particularly concerned about the rising incidence of LGV, Knight points out. "They're worried because, when you have an infection like that, it affects your immune system and makes you more prone to get other diseases such as HIV infection, which can lead to AIDS," he explains.
According to the pro-family advocate, LGV is just one of those sexually transmitted diseases prevalent among homosexual men on which CDC investigators are reporting some alarming data. He notes, "They've also found other diseases that are concentrated among male homosexuals -- a new strain of syphilis, and a strain of tuberculosis that is drug resistant."
"Clearly," Knight contends, "the ongoing promiscuity that characterizes the young homosexual male population is contributing to the spread of illnesses -- perhaps even strains that we hadn't seen before."
Knight says the homosexual community needs to be concerned about LGV, just as public health officials are. And homosexual men cannot rely on condom use to protect them from the disease, he warns, because condoms have proven very ineffective against the disease.
According to CDC statistics, the majority of patients diagnosed with LGV proctitis (anal inflammation due to lymphogranuloma venereum infection) in the U.S. have been HIV-infected men who have sex with other men. Unlike routine cases of chlamydia, LGV can cause chronic gastrointestinal distress, including inflammation and bleeding of the rectum and colon.
New Disease Strains Heighten Risks of Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle
Protect Religious Freedom in U.S. Military
Bush and Congress Urged to Protect Religious Freedom in U.S. Military
By Chad Groening
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Navy chaplain who went on an 18-day hunger strike for the right to pray in Jesus' name says new guidelines adopted by the U.S. Air Force might be expanded to cover America's other armed forces as well. However, he believes those regulations would end up restricting free speech and religious expression.
Lieutenant Gordon Klingenschmitt says the Air Force's new policy does nothing to free up chaplains and other Christian military personnel to pray according to their own religious traditions. Instead, the regulations require inclusive or nondenominational prayers at public events -- which, he points out, in effect prohibits praying in Jesus' name.
Klingenschmitt fears the Air Force regulations regarding prayer may eventually become policy throughout the U.S. military. "The Secretary of Defense has indicated that, when these guidelines are finalized, they will be implemented across all the Armed Services, telling Army, Navy, and Air Force chaplains that they are not allowed to pray in Jesus name," he notes.
Already, the Christian Naval officer points out, some believers in uniform have had to take legal action to fight what he believes amounts to religious persecution in the U.S. armed services. "Many chaplains are suing because they can't get promoted," he says. "They're passed over for promotions. Sixty-five chaplains in the Navy, and Congressman Jones has complaints from over 130 chaplains, including Army and Air Force chaplains who were all punished for their faith."
The new Air Force guidelines on public prayer are "basically the same as the old guidelines," Klingenschmitt contends. "They still require what they call nondenominational prayers, which is just a code for saying no Jesus -- you cannot pray in Jesus name. And if these Air Force guidelines are implemented in the Navy, I will definitely take legal action."
The best way to resolve the issue, the Navy chaplain asserts, would be for the federal legislature to get involved to enact a policy on prayer that safeguards the First Amendment rights of military personnel, or for President Bush to issue an executive order to that effect.
"We need congressional oversight," Klingenschmitt insists. "We still need the President to step in and protect free speech for military chaplains."
Bush and Congress Urged to Protect Religious Freedom in U.S. Military
By Chad Groening
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Navy chaplain who went on an 18-day hunger strike for the right to pray in Jesus' name says new guidelines adopted by the U.S. Air Force might be expanded to cover America's other armed forces as well. However, he believes those regulations would end up restricting free speech and religious expression.
Lieutenant Gordon Klingenschmitt says the Air Force's new policy does nothing to free up chaplains and other Christian military personnel to pray according to their own religious traditions. Instead, the regulations require inclusive or nondenominational prayers at public events -- which, he points out, in effect prohibits praying in Jesus' name.
Klingenschmitt fears the Air Force regulations regarding prayer may eventually become policy throughout the U.S. military. "The Secretary of Defense has indicated that, when these guidelines are finalized, they will be implemented across all the Armed Services, telling Army, Navy, and Air Force chaplains that they are not allowed to pray in Jesus name," he notes.
Already, the Christian Naval officer points out, some believers in uniform have had to take legal action to fight what he believes amounts to religious persecution in the U.S. armed services. "Many chaplains are suing because they can't get promoted," he says. "They're passed over for promotions. Sixty-five chaplains in the Navy, and Congressman Jones has complaints from over 130 chaplains, including Army and Air Force chaplains who were all punished for their faith."
The new Air Force guidelines on public prayer are "basically the same as the old guidelines," Klingenschmitt contends. "They still require what they call nondenominational prayers, which is just a code for saying no Jesus -- you cannot pray in Jesus name. And if these Air Force guidelines are implemented in the Navy, I will definitely take legal action."
The best way to resolve the issue, the Navy chaplain asserts, would be for the federal legislature to get involved to enact a policy on prayer that safeguards the First Amendment rights of military personnel, or for President Bush to issue an executive order to that effect.
"We need congressional oversight," Klingenschmitt insists. "We still need the President to step in and protect free speech for military chaplains."
Bush and Congress Urged to Protect Religious Freedom in U.S. Military
Homosexual Activists' War Against Christianity
Church Seen as Main Obstacle Hindering Wholesale Acceptance of Homosexual Agenda
By Ed Vitagliano
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - "All churches who condemn us will be closed." That was what Michael Swift, a "gay revolutionary," declared in a February 1987 issue of the Gay Community News.
"Michael Swift" was a pseudonym, and the first line of the now-infamous homosexual rant -- which was even reprinted in the Congressional Record -- claimed that the entire piece was a "cruel fantasy" that explained "how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."
The "dream" was filled with a nightmare scenario that seemed like something out of a fascist coup d'etat: "All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked .... [W]e shall make films about the love between heroic men .... The family unit -- spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence -- will be abolished .... All churches who condemn us will be closed."
As the article found its way into Christian publications, believers were horrified, and homosexual activists tried to make light of its contents, claiming that it was intended merely as a satire.
Not many Christians, however, saw the humor in Swift's sentiments, such as the following: "We shall sodomize your sons .... We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together."
Identifying the Opponent
Whether or not the ravings of this "gay revolutionary" were intended as satire, what is striking is the remarkable success of the plan found within the article. Who can doubt that the legal system -- especially following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) striking down sodomy laws -- has been brought to heel by gay activists? Or that Hollywood has freely committed its tremendous resources to the fight for homosexual legitimacy? Or that the family unit will virtually cease to exist in any traditional sense should gay adoption and same-sex "marriage" become legal everywhere?
While they claim to want only equal protection under law, the real agenda of homosexual activists is simple: the complete alteration of American society to fit the homosexual view of human sexuality, marriage and family.
This is not an overexaggeration. Paula Ettelbrick is former legal director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and now executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. Ettelbrick stated, "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so .... Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society .... We must keep our eyes on the goal ... of radically reordering society's views of reality."
That is a pretty comprehensive goal, and activists face a daunting task if they hope to accomplish it. They must change the views of a culture that still remains somewhat anchored in the Judeo-Christian tradition, which considers homosexuality unnatural and sinful. For Ettelbrick and her ilk to convince the American people to change their mind on this issue, the foundation of our culture must be shifted to a new way of perceiving reality that rejects the Judeo-Christian view.
However, that leaves one major institution standing in the way: the Church. Christians who still hold to the Judeo-Christian views of human sexuality, marriage and family are called by religious faithfulness to resist the homosexual movement.
That makes Christians the enemy. In 1987 Steve Warren, a spokesman for the controversial homosexual group ACT UP, wrote an article for The Advocate, a magazine for the gay community. Titled "Warning to the Homophobes," Warren spoke of "the mean-spirited nature of Judeo-Christian morality."
Even in 1987, Warren felt that the homosexual movement could not be stopped. And as activists continued to find success, he promised that "we are going to force you [Christians] to recant everything you have believed or said about sexuality."
Warren said the Bible, especially, would require a face-lift. "Finally, we will in all likelihood want to expunge a number of passages from your Scriptures and rewrite others," he said, "eliminating preferential treatment of marriage and using words that will allow for homosexual interpretations of passages."
Battle Tactics
So a homosexual utopia awaits these activists, if only they can deal with those pesky Christians. But if removing the obstacle of the Church is the strategy, what are the tactics through which this victory might be achieved?
That question was answered as far back as 1985, when in their article for Christopher Street, a gay magazine, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen caused a sensation with their blueprint to "persuade straight America" to accept homosexuality. Their article was expanded into a book on the subject, the national number-one best seller After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the '90s.
Kirk and Madsen focused the heart of their strategy on using the media as a propaganda tool in persuading the majority of Americans that gay is OK. But they also addressed the question of what to do with the hardened opposition -- that is, at least in institutional terms, those following the "religious authority" of the Church. Gay activists, the authors said, should take a two-pronged approach to neutralizing the threat of a vigorous Christian-led opposition.
First, to "confound" what Kirk and Madsen called "the homophobia of true believers," they suggested that gays "muddy the moral waters." This would be accomplished in part by "publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches" and "raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretations of biblical teachings."
This has been done with amazing success in mainline Protestant denominations, such as in the Episcopal Church USA, United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Presbyterian Church USA. Homosexual activists in each of these major denominations have so clouded the issues regarding the biblical view of homosexuality as to threaten each with schism and ruin.
For those churches which resist the siren call to complete moral relativism, Kirk and Madsen submitted a secondary strategy. They suggested that gays "undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times ...."
It should come as no surprise, therefore, when Christians see themselves portrayed on countless television shows as self-righteous bigots or hate-filled lunatics who simply refuse to accept the fact that things have changed in America.
Nevertheless, Kirk and Madsen knew that the religious authority of Christian denominations in the U.S. would be difficult to dispel; churches would therefore continue to act as a powerful braking mechanism on any momentum for the acceptance of the homosexual agenda. Kirk and Madsen understood, for example, that simply poking fun of "bigoted Southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred" would not be enough.
Instead, they said, "Against the mighty pull of institutional Religion one must set the mightier draw of Science and Public Opinion (the shield and sword of that accursed 'secular humanism'). Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion."
Thus Christians involved in this theater of the culture war have become accustomed to defending the Judeo-Christian view on sexuality against claims that science has "proven" that homosexuality is genetic. The same is true of the claim that all major mental health and medical professional groups have declared that being gay or lesbian is as natural as being left-handed. Such "scientific" claims have no doubt been instrumental in the dramatic shifts of American public opinion on this topic.
End Game
But beyond these tactics, Kirk and Madsen said plans must also be drawn up to deal with "the entrenched enemy," which might persist in resisting even in the face of the preliminary schemes. They said: "At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights -- long after other gay ads have become commonplace -- it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified."
Again, astute Christians who are paying attention to what is happening in our culture can already see this occurring. On high school and college campuses, for example, believers who dare to speak up against the homosexual agenda are being ridiculed and smeared. In corporations where they work, some Christians who refuse to acquiesce to the reigning pro-gay environment are reprimanded or fired.
Nor does it require prophetic insight to understand that churches will not be immune from coercion, either. In fact, gay and lesbian activists at the 1986 National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights made this demand: "Institutions that discriminate against lesbian and gay people should be denied tax-exempt status."
Is it conceivable that in the near future, churches could be threatened with the loss of their tax-exempt status if they refuse to hire a homosexual employee?
Some might scoff at such a threat, relying on the Constitutional protection of religion in the U.S. as a shield. But some homosexual activists seem to view religious liberty as an obstacle to be overcome. For example, lesbian lawyer Barbara Findlay predicted that "the legal struggle for queer rights will one day be a showdown between freedom of religion versus sexual orientation."
If sexual orientation is ever enshrined as a protected status in federal and state laws, which right will win that showdown?
For the time being, activists can simply attempt to suppress religious free speech whenever the mood hits them.
For example, when a church in Boston hosted a 2005 conference with a message that Jesus can free gays and lesbians from that lifestyle, they were harassed and terrorized by hundreds of homosexual activists and sympathizers outside -- while Boston police stood by and did nothing (See related article).
Finally, if activists ever achieve their goal of having sexual orientation included in federal hate crime statutes, many pro-family groups fear such a moment will be a beachhead on the way to criminalizing "anti-gay" speech and thought.
In his article, Warren's final warning should cause wise Christians to accurately discern the times in which we live: "We have captured the liberal establishment and the press. We have already beaten you on a number of battlefields. And we have the spirit of the age on our side. You have neither the faith nor the strength to fight us, so you might as well surrender now."
Homosexual Activists' War Against Christianity
By Ed Vitagliano
February 21, 2006
(AgapePress) - "All churches who condemn us will be closed." That was what Michael Swift, a "gay revolutionary," declared in a February 1987 issue of the Gay Community News.
"Michael Swift" was a pseudonym, and the first line of the now-infamous homosexual rant -- which was even reprinted in the Congressional Record -- claimed that the entire piece was a "cruel fantasy" that explained "how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."
The "dream" was filled with a nightmare scenario that seemed like something out of a fascist coup d'etat: "All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked .... [W]e shall make films about the love between heroic men .... The family unit -- spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence -- will be abolished .... All churches who condemn us will be closed."
As the article found its way into Christian publications, believers were horrified, and homosexual activists tried to make light of its contents, claiming that it was intended merely as a satire.
Not many Christians, however, saw the humor in Swift's sentiments, such as the following: "We shall sodomize your sons .... We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together."
Identifying the Opponent
Whether or not the ravings of this "gay revolutionary" were intended as satire, what is striking is the remarkable success of the plan found within the article. Who can doubt that the legal system -- especially following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) striking down sodomy laws -- has been brought to heel by gay activists? Or that Hollywood has freely committed its tremendous resources to the fight for homosexual legitimacy? Or that the family unit will virtually cease to exist in any traditional sense should gay adoption and same-sex "marriage" become legal everywhere?
While they claim to want only equal protection under law, the real agenda of homosexual activists is simple: the complete alteration of American society to fit the homosexual view of human sexuality, marriage and family.
This is not an overexaggeration. Paula Ettelbrick is former legal director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and now executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. Ettelbrick stated, "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so .... Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society .... We must keep our eyes on the goal ... of radically reordering society's views of reality."
That is a pretty comprehensive goal, and activists face a daunting task if they hope to accomplish it. They must change the views of a culture that still remains somewhat anchored in the Judeo-Christian tradition, which considers homosexuality unnatural and sinful. For Ettelbrick and her ilk to convince the American people to change their mind on this issue, the foundation of our culture must be shifted to a new way of perceiving reality that rejects the Judeo-Christian view.
However, that leaves one major institution standing in the way: the Church. Christians who still hold to the Judeo-Christian views of human sexuality, marriage and family are called by religious faithfulness to resist the homosexual movement.
That makes Christians the enemy. In 1987 Steve Warren, a spokesman for the controversial homosexual group ACT UP, wrote an article for The Advocate, a magazine for the gay community. Titled "Warning to the Homophobes," Warren spoke of "the mean-spirited nature of Judeo-Christian morality."
Even in 1987, Warren felt that the homosexual movement could not be stopped. And as activists continued to find success, he promised that "we are going to force you [Christians] to recant everything you have believed or said about sexuality."
Warren said the Bible, especially, would require a face-lift. "Finally, we will in all likelihood want to expunge a number of passages from your Scriptures and rewrite others," he said, "eliminating preferential treatment of marriage and using words that will allow for homosexual interpretations of passages."
Battle Tactics
So a homosexual utopia awaits these activists, if only they can deal with those pesky Christians. But if removing the obstacle of the Church is the strategy, what are the tactics through which this victory might be achieved?
That question was answered as far back as 1985, when in their article for Christopher Street, a gay magazine, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen caused a sensation with their blueprint to "persuade straight America" to accept homosexuality. Their article was expanded into a book on the subject, the national number-one best seller After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the '90s.
Kirk and Madsen focused the heart of their strategy on using the media as a propaganda tool in persuading the majority of Americans that gay is OK. But they also addressed the question of what to do with the hardened opposition -- that is, at least in institutional terms, those following the "religious authority" of the Church. Gay activists, the authors said, should take a two-pronged approach to neutralizing the threat of a vigorous Christian-led opposition.
First, to "confound" what Kirk and Madsen called "the homophobia of true believers," they suggested that gays "muddy the moral waters." This would be accomplished in part by "publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches" and "raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretations of biblical teachings."
This has been done with amazing success in mainline Protestant denominations, such as in the Episcopal Church USA, United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Presbyterian Church USA. Homosexual activists in each of these major denominations have so clouded the issues regarding the biblical view of homosexuality as to threaten each with schism and ruin.
For those churches which resist the siren call to complete moral relativism, Kirk and Madsen submitted a secondary strategy. They suggested that gays "undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times ...."
It should come as no surprise, therefore, when Christians see themselves portrayed on countless television shows as self-righteous bigots or hate-filled lunatics who simply refuse to accept the fact that things have changed in America.
Nevertheless, Kirk and Madsen knew that the religious authority of Christian denominations in the U.S. would be difficult to dispel; churches would therefore continue to act as a powerful braking mechanism on any momentum for the acceptance of the homosexual agenda. Kirk and Madsen understood, for example, that simply poking fun of "bigoted Southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred" would not be enough.
Instead, they said, "Against the mighty pull of institutional Religion one must set the mightier draw of Science and Public Opinion (the shield and sword of that accursed 'secular humanism'). Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion."
Thus Christians involved in this theater of the culture war have become accustomed to defending the Judeo-Christian view on sexuality against claims that science has "proven" that homosexuality is genetic. The same is true of the claim that all major mental health and medical professional groups have declared that being gay or lesbian is as natural as being left-handed. Such "scientific" claims have no doubt been instrumental in the dramatic shifts of American public opinion on this topic.
End Game
But beyond these tactics, Kirk and Madsen said plans must also be drawn up to deal with "the entrenched enemy," which might persist in resisting even in the face of the preliminary schemes. They said: "At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights -- long after other gay ads have become commonplace -- it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified."
Again, astute Christians who are paying attention to what is happening in our culture can already see this occurring. On high school and college campuses, for example, believers who dare to speak up against the homosexual agenda are being ridiculed and smeared. In corporations where they work, some Christians who refuse to acquiesce to the reigning pro-gay environment are reprimanded or fired.
Nor does it require prophetic insight to understand that churches will not be immune from coercion, either. In fact, gay and lesbian activists at the 1986 National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights made this demand: "Institutions that discriminate against lesbian and gay people should be denied tax-exempt status."
Is it conceivable that in the near future, churches could be threatened with the loss of their tax-exempt status if they refuse to hire a homosexual employee?
Some might scoff at such a threat, relying on the Constitutional protection of religion in the U.S. as a shield. But some homosexual activists seem to view religious liberty as an obstacle to be overcome. For example, lesbian lawyer Barbara Findlay predicted that "the legal struggle for queer rights will one day be a showdown between freedom of religion versus sexual orientation."
If sexual orientation is ever enshrined as a protected status in federal and state laws, which right will win that showdown?
For the time being, activists can simply attempt to suppress religious free speech whenever the mood hits them.
For example, when a church in Boston hosted a 2005 conference with a message that Jesus can free gays and lesbians from that lifestyle, they were harassed and terrorized by hundreds of homosexual activists and sympathizers outside -- while Boston police stood by and did nothing (See related article).
Finally, if activists ever achieve their goal of having sexual orientation included in federal hate crime statutes, many pro-family groups fear such a moment will be a beachhead on the way to criminalizing "anti-gay" speech and thought.
In his article, Warren's final warning should cause wise Christians to accurately discern the times in which we live: "We have captured the liberal establishment and the press. We have already beaten you on a number of battlefields. And we have the spirit of the age on our side. You have neither the faith nor the strength to fight us, so you might as well surrender now."
Homosexual Activists' War Against Christianity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)