Sandy Hook Killer’s computer: Video “Depicting a Man/Boy Relationship”

Disturbing new revelations about Adam Lanza have surfaced from the official police report. It appears he trended to homsexuality and kinky man/boy sex. The North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) promotes the legalization of man/boy sex. NAMBLA uses the same tactics as do the homosexuals to promote same sex marriage.

According to Michael W. Chapman from CNS News:

The state’s attorney report on the horrific murders at  the Sandy Hook Elementary School by shooter Adam Lanza found no “conclusive motive” for his actions but did document unsettling facts about the 20-year-old killer, including computer files he kept on the rights of pedophiles, a movie about man/boy love, instant messages concerning “homosexual fantasies,” numerous mass murder documents, and a computer game entitled “School Shooting.”

In “School Shooting,” an amateur computer game, “the player controls a character who enters a school and shoots at students,” reads an Investigation Report (DPS-302-E) that is among the 1,000-plus pages comprising the state’s attorney report on the shootings.

Lanza, after shooting his mother Nancy Lanza at home on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, drove to the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and shot and killed 20 children and six adults, and then shot himself.  (Full report, text and images here.  Summary report here.)

Read more.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Gays forcing Catholic school to hire man ‘married’ to another man

Southwest Airlines Funds ‘Creating Change’ Conference Promoting Homosexual Extremism and Abortion

Who’s right: Putin says gays are pedophiles or ABC’s “Bachelor” saying they are perverted?

Dinesh D’Souza vs. Bill Ayers: The Debate at Dartmouth 1/30/2014

The Right Scoop has posted the full debate between Dinesh D’Souza and Bill Ayers at Dartmouth on January 30, 2014. The  Right Scoop states:

They begin by each taking 18 minutes to state their positions. After that is complete they respond to each others positions for 5 or 10 minutes each, and then they begin asking each other questions directly. After that ends the Q&A begins.

If you don’t have too much time I’d recommend skipping the 18 minute speeches and begin where they are responding to each others speeches at around the 42 minute mark. But you’ll be missing out on some great stuff, I assure you, especially D’Souza’s view of the greatness of America.

Southwest Airlines Funds ‘Creating Change’ Conference Promoting Homosexual Extremism and Abortion

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) is exposing the radical corporate giving priorities of Southwest Airlines – including Southwest’s role as a major funder of the annual homosexual activist “Creating Change”conference put on by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF).

Creating Change, which begins today in Houston, Texas, promotes: the “homosexualization” of Christianity; extreme transgender activism including laws allowing transgender “girls” and “women” (read: boys/men in dresses) to use female restrooms; pro-homosexual/transgender programs in schools (even for very young students); and sadomasochism.

Creating Change is the organizing event for more than 3,000 LGBT (lesbian, “gay,” bisexual and “transgender”) activists across the nation – with “how to” workshops on:

  • Redefining Christianity with pro-homosexual messaging. One Creating Change workshop , “Catholic Teaching and LGBT Justice: Good in Bed Together? God’s Truth!” is described as follows (emphasis added): “Use solid Catholic teaching, tradition and practice when advocating for the equality of same-sex love? Yes.…We will work interactively from your wisdom and lived experience and join it with the best of Catholic sexual ethics to craft a message that speaks powerfully to people in the ‘malleable middle.’ This is subversive work!”
  • Advancing the radical “transgender” agenda, including winning government (Obama-care)/insurance coverage for body-disfiguring “sex reassignment surgeries” and hormone therapies;
  • Promoting extreme agendas under the guise of “sexual freedom.”  As the euphemism for the radical, “anything goes” fringe of liberal sex politics, “Sexual Freedom” includes advocacy for: prostitution (“sex workers”); “polyamory” (multiple-partner sexual relationships); “kinky sex” (sadomasochism); pornography; sexual “swingers”; and opposing obscenity laws and public decency efforts, e.g., banning strip clubs in neighborhoods;
  • Defending abortion-on-demand, under the euphemism of “Reproductive Justice.”

Southwest took out a full-page ad in the Creating Change program with an accompanying letter (see pages 22-23) from Communications VP Linda Rutherford, who wrote, “Southwest Airlines is proud to support organizations like the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.”

AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera said: “The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force leads the Hard Left of the homosexual/transgender movement. It even gives out an annual award to its favorite self-identified sadomasochist (‘Leather Leadership Award’). Corporations like Southwest are giving more money than ever to LGBT organizations – but I doubt that they want their consumers to know about the extreme nature of the immoral agendas they are underwriting.

“Creating Change is heavily dedicated to ‘queering’ Christianity – as their workshops put it,” LaBarbera said. ”In other words, Southwest is subsidizing a conference that instructs LGBT activists on how to mislead believers and undermine the clear tenets of Scripture that proscribe homosexual behavior as sinful.”

Other corporate/organizational funders of “Creating Change” include:

Note that Planned Parenthood is also a major supporter of Creating Change.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Southwest Airlines through their online Contact Page – or call Customer Relations at 214-932-0333 (press #1).

RELATED COLUMN: Maine’s highest court: Transgender student’s rights were violated | The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

The Most Misunderstood of the Ten Commandments

Translations have confused God’s name. The preface to the Goodspeed Bible offers this explanation—“In this translation we have followed the orthodox Jewish tradition and substituted ‘the Lord’ for the name…wherever [the reader] sees LORD or GOD.” This is true of nearly all translations!

Consider Isaiah 42:8 in these translations—

  • “I am the LORD, that is my name.” King James Version
  •  “I am Jehovah, that is my name” American Revised Version
  •  “I am Yahweh, that is my name.” Jerusalem Bible

When the apostle Paul saw an idol to the unknown god on Mars Hill, he told them, “the times of this ignorance God winked at, but in a time of judgment, He commands all to repent [and go by the best information available], Acts 17:30,31.

Josephus, a Jewish historian, contemporary to Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 AD, described the temple furniture and the High Priest’s golden crown, “in which was engraven the sacred name—it consists of four vowels.” Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 5, Section 7.

Some modern authorities agree. “The letters of the Name of God in Hebrew are yod, hay, vav, and hay. They are frequently mispronounced Yahveh …[but] they are all vowels.” Rabbi Lawrence Kushner, The Book of Words, Jewish Lights Publ, p. 27.

Some say those letters are consonants, but a renowned Hebrew textbook says, “Long before the introduction of vowel-signs…the three letters, yothe, hay, waw, were used to represent long vowels” A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew, Weingreen, Oxford University Press, 1959, p. 7-8.

God’s name is spelled yod, hay, waw [vav], hay. The yod has the vowel sound of “y” as in baby or lady, but as a consonant it is used to pronounce Yahweh, a name that many Jews consider to be God’s name today, unaware of Josephus’ statement that His name “consists of four vowels.”

The hay has the sound of “ah” as in Father. The yod has the vowel sound of “oo” as in HallelUIA, an international word that means praise to God (IAUA) in most languages.

If you think about it, with God’s name as only vowels and representing His character,  is all music or melody with no obstuctioins to air flow as we use to punctuate our words with consonants, like b,d or g. We might not be able to even talk if God weren’t lending His name (vowels) so we could make sounds.

Christ said, “I am come in my Father’s name and you receive me not. If another [Satan] shall come in his own name, him you will receive.” John 5:43. This is about the devil’s itch to be worshiped as God, and he will come as Jesus working miracles to deceive the whole world as foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-11.

Knowing God’s name and how Christ came in it (His Hebrew name, not a Greek translation as “Jesus”) could spare us deception when God’s elect will be sealed with truth, Revelation 14:1, RSV.

The prophet Joel wrote that the moon would become as blood before the “day of the Lord” and whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be delivered, Joel 2:31,32. With a “blood moon” scheduled for Passover this spring, why not take a deeper look at God’s name?

Summary: God’s name is not the Lord and the Lord’s name is not God. Those are generic titles that translators used to replace His name. Doing so violates the 3rd Commandment not to take His name in vain or empty. Not having His name can be a setup for deception when the devil personates Christ as suggested by John 5:43.

Homosexual Group Attempting to Overturn Florida’s Marriage Protection Amendment

The Orlando Sentinel reports, “This may be the year that gay political clout comes out of the closet in a Florida governor’s race. Gay activists and others sympathetic to their causes are eyeing the 2014 governor’s race as an opening, with a Democratic candidate, Charlie Crist, who professes to support the call for equal rights for marriage and workplace anti-discrimination.”

It appears politics has now spilled over into the courts as the homosexual group Equality Florida wants to overturn the marriage protection act in Florida’s Constitution.

On Tuesday, January 21, 2014, John Stemberger, President and General Counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, issued the following statement in response to Equality Florida’s announcement that they are filing a federal lawsuit to attempt to overturn Florida’s Marriage Protection Amendment found in Article I, Section 27 of the Florida Constitution:

Sixty two percent of Floridians have decisively spoken on this issue. Gay activists cannot win in the marketplace of ideas, so they have resorted to trying to find renegade courts who have little respect for the rule of law to create social change that would never happen through the people or their elected representatives.

Today’s lawsuit is nothing more than a publicity stunt.  Filed in Miami, it represents “forum shopping” in the most liberal legal venue in the state. However, we are confident that Florida’s Attorney General Pam Bondi will provide a vigorous defense of Florida’s long held law and in doing so will expose the radical views and overreaching legal positions set forth in today’s lawsuit.

The Florida Family Policy Council will vigorously defend the victory of 2008 and the constitutional mandate from Floridians that marriage is between one man and one woman. Hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens volunteered to see marriage protected in Florida, and we will not sit idly by and watch leftist groups try to undermine this common-sense legal precedent. We will spend as much time and money as necessary to oppose those who seek to redefine marriage in Florida.

The six same-sex plaintiff couples in this lawsuit appear to be very sincere and are certainly free to self-define themselves and have private civil commitment ceremonies.  But they, and the activists who motivated them, are not free to redefine a fundamental human institution which has served civilization since the beginning of time.

In states where marriage has been redefined it has produced absurd results– in the law, in education, in religious liberties and in what is best for children, families, and the common good of society.  When it comes to defining marriage, history will always be on the side of nature, biology, logic, and the collective wisdom of human history.  We look forward to a robust debate on this issue as it makes it way through the courts.”

RELATED COLUMNS:

5 Horrific Examples of Cultural Decay in America

Gay issues may rise in Florida governor’s race

White Paper: Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement

Jimmy LaSalvia, Former GOProud Founder, On Republican Party’s ‘Cultural Disease,’

White Paper: Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement

Lately, the gay movement seems to be making large gains in its war on America’s Judeo-Christian culture. Gay characters have become the norm on sitcoms; it has become fashionable to attack the Boy Scouts; homosexual propaganda inundates many of our public schools; nearly all the mainstream religious denominations have “revised” their understanding of Biblical teaching concerning homosexuality; and the gay “rights” legislative agenda is succeeding beyond the advocates’ wildest imaginations.

And yet the destructive impact homosexuality has upon Western Civilization is rarely discussed by columnists, reporters, religious leaders, politicians or by anyone else for that matter. Even some conservative publications choose to ignore the issue and instead have published articles arguing for greater tolerance of the gay lifestyle.

Indeed, on the homosexual issue, conservatives seem divided between a “live and let live” attitude and one that concludes that the homosexual agenda will have to be curtailed if the Judeo-Christian culture is to survive. However, overwhelming evidence supports the belief that homosexuality is a sexual deviancy often accompanied by disorders that have dire consequences for our culture. A vast amount of data demonstrating the deviant nature of the gay lifestyle is ignored by the media as well as the leadership of the psychological, psychiatric, and medical professions.

It is difficult to convey the dark side of the homosexual culture without appearing harsh. However, it is time to acknowledge that homosexual behavior threatens the foundation of Western civilization ─ the nuclear family. An unmistakable manifestation of the attack on the family unit is the homosexual community’s efforts to target children both for their own sexual pleasure and to enlarge the homosexual movement. The homosexual community and its allies in the media scoff at this argument. They insist it is merely a tactic to demonize the homosexual movement. After all, they argue, heterosexual molestation is a far more serious problem.

Unfortunately, the truth is stranger than fiction. Research confirms that homosexuals molest children at a rate vastly higher than heterosexuals, and the mainstream homosexual culture commonly promotes sex with children. Homosexual leaders repeatedly argue for the freedom to engage in consensual sex with children, and blind surveys reveal a shockingly high number of homosexuals admit to sexual contact with minors. Indeed, the homosexual community is driving the worldwide campaign to lower the legal age of consent.

This trend comes at the expense of our children’s safety. The incident in Los Angeles involving group homes operated by the Gay and Lesbian Adolescent Social Services (GLASS) exemplifies this danger. GLASS receives taxpayer monies to take in troubled youth referred to them by the social service departments of various southern counties in California.

GLASS’s own website should have been warning enough. GLASS believes that some children are born gay (a view not backed by any science) and announced that they target “youth who are confused about their sexual identities.” The website links to a myriad of gay sites targeting the youth, including one promoting a book that promotes sex with children. GLASS’s founder and former executive director, Teresa DeCrescenzo, edited a book that helps youth discover their homosexuality.

It came as no surprise that the California Department of Social Services found “on numerous occasions beginning at least as early as 1994, adults affiliated with GLASS, including staff members, members of the GLASS board of directors and volunteers, sexually abused or molested children who were placed with GLASS.” The Department of Social Services found that DeCrescenzo, aware of the allegations of molestation, determined staff conduct not to be inappropriate. Apparently, DeCrescenzo believes molestation is part of the “coming out” process that she glorifies in her writings.

One would think that a molestation factory disguised as a group home would be a good reason for the State of California to shut down the whole GLASS group home operation. Remarkably, the state of California, allowing GLASS to continue operation, removed a few individuals and placed GLASS on probation. Even though additional molestation incidents occurred at GLASS facilities in 1999, they remain in operation until this day.

A Los Angeles Times investigation found that, in some cases, “it appears authorities never fully investigated those reports.” Indeed, not one person has been charged with child molestation or endangerment by state Attorney General Bill Lockyer, an avid promoter of the gay agenda. After all, that would be hateful. If such a group home were operated by heterosexuals, the facilities would be shut down, any existing licenses revoked, and numerous criminal charges filed.

Homosexuals are targeting not just youth group homes, but all groups that work with youth. When a California family sued the Scouts in 1993 for exposing their son to a Scout leader who molested him, the Scouts were ordered to turn over 25,000 pages of documents to the plaintiff. This unprecedented glimpse into the world of Scout pedophiles revealed that thousands of boys had been molested by Scout leaders and other volunteers between 1971 and 1991 resulting in the expulsion of over 1,800 Scout volunteers for pedophile activity. The documents show that some Scout leaders molested over forty boys before getting caught and that many, once caught, simply moved to a different Scout troop and continued abusing boys.

Gay activists have spun the Scout molestation epidemic as a heterosexual problem. Examination of many of the higher profile cases, however, reveals that Scout molesters are attracted exclusively to boys and many lead mainstream gay lifestyles. John Hemstreet is a typical example. Hemstreet is a convicted child molester, former Boy Scout leader, and currently the President of the Toledo, Ohio chapter of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). PFLAG is one of the groups leading the nationwide attack on the Boy Scouts of America.

Incredibly, the pro-pedophile group, North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which calls itself a homosexual group, wrote a letter to the national Scout office urging “the Boy Scouts of America to cease its discrimination against openly gay or lesbian persons in the appointment of its scoutmasters and scouters and in its membership. This will permit scouts to be exposed to a variety of lifestyles and will permit more of those individuals who genuinely wish to serve boys to do so.”

Using twisted logic, pro-gay academics argue in various social science journals that the molestation of boys is not a gay lifestyle issue and that such men are not really homosexuals. It is simply amazing that gay propagandists and sexology “experts” are successfully bamboozling the public and the media into believing that a man’s exclusive focus on young males should not be defined as homosexuality! But if an exclusive attraction of a male to other males of any age is not homosexuality, what is?

On one hand, homosexuals publicly claim that the molestation of boys is not part of the homosexual lifestyle. On the other, they are quietly establishing the legal parameters exempting the molestation of boys from prosecution on anti-discrimination grounds. For example, in Nevada a forty-two year-old man was arrested for molesting a sixteen year-old boy but was not charged by the district attorney. The reason given was that to do so would “discriminate against a class of people.” The deputy district attorney added that to charge the man “would be singling out homosexuals.” For years, conservatives have argued that so called anti-discrimination laws would eventually lead to granting legal protections for various homosexual deviances. It appears that time is coming sooner than expected.

Research on the homosexual lifestyle confirms it is almost exclusively a youth oriented culture. Very few gays exhibit a preference for older men. Some admit to a focus on teenage boys, some on prepubescent boys, and many cross over between categories. All are subsets of the homosexual deviancy. Moreover, most pedophiles consider themselves to be gay. In a 1988 study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, 86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Child prostitution expert Dr. Jennifer James reports that the number of boy prostitutes who identify themselves as homosexuals has risen from 10% to 60% in the last fifteen years.

Most of the public is by now aware of NAMBLA, a group that openly promotes sex with minor boys and claims that boy-lovers respond to the needs of the boys they love. NAMBLA is currently the target of a class action lawsuit by parents of children molested and, in one case, murdered by individuals associated with NAMBLA. Publicly, the mainstream gay organizations distance themselves from NAMBLA. Clearly, this is merely a public relations ploy as the gay leadership realizes its agenda would suffer greatly if the public knew the truth.

The reality is that NAMBLA not only describes itself as part of the gay rights coalition, but its literature states that one of its goals is “cooperating with the lesbian, gay, and other movements for sexual liberation.” NAMBLA even “provide[s] financial and other assistance to GLB [Gay, lesbian, bi-sexual] youth organizations . . . .” Indeed, some NAMBLA chapters meet at mainstream gay centers such as Philadelphia’s Gay and Lesbian Community Center. NAMBLA’s meetings and conferences always feature mainstream gay leaders and speakers. For example, Don Kilhefner, of the Los Angeles Gay Community Service Center, gave a speech to Los Angeles NAMBLA members on the subject of “The Significance of Man/Boy Love in the Gay Community.”

The most comprehensive gay networking website, the Queer Resource Directory (www.qrd.org), links every gay group in the country including NAMBLA and other homosexual groups that focus on youth. NAMBLA marches in gay pride parades with the consent of the gay leadership. Many of the homosexual movement’s most prominent leaders endorse NAMBLA and its goals. Gay authors and leaders such as Allen Ginsberg, Gayle Rubin, Larry Kramer (founder of ACT-UP), Pat Califia, Jane Rule, Michael Kearns, and Michel Foucault have all written in favor of either NAMBLA or man-boy relationships. Harry Hay, whom many consider the founder of the American homosexual movement, invited NAMBLA members to march with him in the 1993 “March on Washington” gay rights parade. He also marched in the 1986 Los Angeles gay parade wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words “NAMBLA walks with me.”

Leading mainstream homosexual newspapers and magazines such as the Advocate, Edge, Metroline, The Guide, and The San Francisco Sentinel have not only published pro-NAMBLA articles and columns but also many have editorialized in favor of NAMBLA and sex with children. The editor of The Guide, Ed Hougen, stated in an interview with Lambda Report, “I believe they [NAMBLA] are generally interested in the right of young people to be sexual . . . . I am glad there is a group like NAMBLA that is willing to be courageous.” The San Francisco Sentinel was more blunt: “NAMBLA’s position on sex is not unreasonable, just unpopular. [W]hen a 14 year old gay boy approaches a man for sex, it’s because he wants sex with a man.”

There is also the matter of NAMBLA’s membership status in the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), recognized at one time by the United Nations as the official Non-Government Organization (NGO) representing the gay community worldwide. When NAMBLA’s ILGA membership became public, a whirlwind of international controversy erupted. Some gay leaders viewed this attention as harmful to the gay movement’s image and goals and urged the expulsion of NAMBLA for purely political purposes.

However, the media failed to report that ILGA itself had hosted workshops on pedophilia and passed resolutions in 1985, 1988, and 1990 to abolish age of consent laws claiming that “same sex age of consent laws often operate to oppress and not to protect” and supported “the right of every individual, regardless of age, to explore and develop her or his sexuality.”

Eventually, reacting to congressional legislation threatening the reduction of $119 million in financial support, the United Nations kicked out ILGA in 1995 for refusing to sever ties with a half dozen member groups that advocated or promoted pedophilia. Revealingly, even though ILGA did expel NAMBLA (many say it was for show), it could not muster enough support among its membership to expel other more powerful and discreet pro-pedophile organizations from Germany and other countries. It is extremely revealing that the majority of members of the world’s leading homosexual coalition, the ILGA, decided they would rather be excluded from UN deliberations than vote out groups that advocate sex with children.

Aside from support for NAMBLA by the mainstream gay community, there is a wealth of evidence that homosexuals are the prime force behind the escalating child molestation epidemic. Indeed, over the last fifteen years the homosexual community and its academic allies have published a large quantity of articles that claim sex with children is not harmful to children but, as stated in one homosexual journal, “constitute an aspect of gay and lesbian life.” Such articles have appeared in pro-homosexual academic journals such as The Journal of Homosexuality, The Journal of Sex Research, Archives of Sexual Behavior, and The International Journal of Medicine and Law. The editorial board of the leading pedophile academic journal, Paidika, is dominated by prominent homosexual scholars such as San Francisco State University professor John DeCecco, who happens to edit the Journal of Homosexuality.

Indeed, the Journal of Homosexuality is the premier academic journal of the mainstream homosexual world and yet it published a special double issue entitled, Male Intergenerational Intimacy, containing dozens of articles portraying sex between men and minor boys as loving relationships. One article states that parents should view the pedophile who loves their son “not as a rival or competitor, not as a theft of their property, but as a partner in the boy’s upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home.”

Similarly, mainstream gay publications make no effort to hide their pro-pedophilia views. For example, BLK, a leading black homosexual publication, defended pedophilia with an article entitled, “Must Men Who Love Boys Be Guilty of Sexual Misconduct?” San Francisco’s leading homosexual newspaper, The Sentinel, bluntly editorialized, “The love between man and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality.”

In 1995, the homosexual magazine Guide stated:

We can be proud that the gay movement has been home to the few voices who have had the courage to say out loud that children are naturally sexual, that they deserve the right to sexual expression with whoever they choose . . . [w]e must listen to our prophets. Instead of fearing being labeled pedophiles, we must proudly proclaim that sex is good, including children’s sexuality . . . . We must do it for the children’s sake.
Without equivocating, the Guide is saying that gays must molest children for their own sake!

While the mainstream media has apparently refused to engage in any kind of investigative expose of the gay movement, it is not difficult to find support for child sex among key homosexual leaders in their publications and literature. For example, the founder of the infamous homosexual group, ACT-UP, Larry Kramer, wrote in his book, Report from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist, “In those instances where children do have sex with their homosexual elders, be they teachers or anyone else, I submit that often, very often, the child desires the activity, and perhaps even solicits it.”

In a letter to the editor of a gay newspaper, Andy Humm, a key leader of one of America’s largest gay youth groups, Advocates for Youth, said, “No one should be denied basic civil rights because of his or her orientation, whether the person be homosexual, heterosexual, transsexual, transvestite, pedophile, sadist, masochist, asexual, whatever one can imagine . . . . They are in themselves natural variations.”

A 1995 content analysis by Dr. Judith Reisman of the Institute for Media Education, focusing on advertisements in the nation’s most influential homosexual newspaper, The Advocate, reveals that 63% of the personal ads sought or offered prostitution. Many of them openly solicit boys. The Advocate also advertises a “Penetrable Boy Doll . . . available in 3 provocative positions.” Reisman found that the number of erotic boy images per issue of The Advocate averaged fourteen. Some homosexual publications, such as the southern Californian newspaper Update, are brazen enough to advertise for donations for the legal costs of homosexuals arrested for child molestation.

Indeed, NAMBLA and other pro-pedophile literature can be found wherever homosexuals congregate (homosexual bookstores, bathhouses, festivals, gay bars, etc.). When Americans for Truth About Homosexuality leader Peter LaBarbera asked the manager of one of Boston’s leading gay bookstores, Glad Day Bookshop, to quit selling pedophile literature he replied, “Our policy is to sell everything that’s available to the [gay] community.”

The owner of a prominent Philadelphia gay bookstore, Giovanni’s Room, pulled NAMBLA’s literature off its shelves only due to boycott threats but commented, “I think it’s a strange day for gay culture when we start banning something because it makes us uncomfortable . . . especially when that thing is a foundation of gay literature. If we pulled all the books that had adult-youth sexual themes, we wouldn’t have many novels, memoirs, or biographies left.”

The most popular gay fiction books on the market today are rich with idyllic accounts of intergenerational relationships according to writer Philip Guichard in a Village Voice article. Doubleday published a book in 1998, The Gay Canon: Great Books Every Gay Man Should Read, which recommends numerous works that portray sex with boys in a positive manner. The Border bookstore chain sells a book, A History of Gay Literature: The Male Tradition, which includes a chapter devoted to the history of pro-pedophile literature as an indisputable part of homosexual literary history.

The Gay Men’s Press publishes a best seller list on which appear such books as Dares to Speak: History and Contemporary Perspectives on Boy-Love, Some Boys, and For a Lost Soldier. All these books can only be described as pro-pedophile. The authoritative Encyclopedia of Homosexuality claims to acknowledge, “the fact that until very recently man/boy love relationships were accepted as a part, and indeed were a major part, of male homosexuality.” The leading dictionary of the homosexual culture, The Queens’ Vernacular, lists 254 of its 12,000 words as having to do with sex with boys.

One of the nation’s largest publishers of homosexual literature and books, Alyson Publications, also publishes pro-pedophile books such as Gay Sex: A Manual for Men Who Love Men. This book contains detailed instructions for homosexuals on how to avoid discovery and arrest when having sex with boys: “Avoid situations where a number of men are having sex with the same boy, or group of boys, over a period of time.” Unknown to most people, Alyson Publications is also probably America’s largest provider of pro-gay literature and reading material to public schools. Unfortunately, this market is growing at a tremendous pace. The infamous Heather has Two Mommies, currently being used in many public school systems to educate children about homosexuality, is an Alyson Publications book.

Even the alleged birthplace of the modern day homosexual movement, the Stonewall Bar in New York City, was notorious as a place where older homosexuals arranged to meet young boys for sex.

“Mainstream” homosexual conferences commonly feature speeches about intergenerational sex as it is now called. For example, at one of the nation’s largest homosexual gatherings, the annual National Gay Lesbian Task Force convention, featured a workshop at its 2001 confab entitled, Your Eyes Say Yes But the Law Says No, which included a speech by an S&M activist about laws affecting intergenerational sex. The convention also featured another workshop entitled Drag 101: How to Turn Kids in Make-up into Kings and Queens.

Pick up any gay newspaper or gay travel publication and one finds ads for sex tours to Burma, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and other countries infamous for boy prostitution. Published exposés on such tours by former homosexuals reveal that thousands of American gay men are patronizing boy prostitutes around the world. The most popular travel guide for homosexuals, Spartacus Gay Guides, is replete with information about where to find boys for sex and, as a friendly warning, lists penalties in various countries for sodomy with boys if caught.

The government of Sri Lanka announced that more than 10,000 boy prostitutes work its beaches as a result of the high demand created by affluent Western homosexuals. But the dirty little secret of the American homosexual community is the thousands of boy prostitutes who service them within our borders. A book exposing the boy prostitution world, For Money or Love, Boy Prostitution in America, reveals that boys are selling themselves not only in the cities of New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Chicago, Baltimore, and New Orleans, but also in smaller towns across the country. In street jargon, the boys are known as “chickens” and their customers are known as “chickenhawks.”

Homosexual Internet sites are no different. A quick search using the words “gay” and “boys” easily locates thousands of homosexual sites that promote sex with young boys and/or contain child pornography. Indeed, it is the mainstream homosexual groups who filed suit to block Virginia Legislation, passed in 2001, restricting Internet use that proves harmful to children (such as chat rooms commonly used by pedophiles to find victims). Similarly, a pedophile’s conviction in Iowa for showing pornographic videos to five minor boys sparked widespread protests from homosexual activists when the conviction was upheld on appeal by the Iowa Supreme Court.

The Holy Grail of the pedophile movement is the lowering or elimination of all age of consent laws. The main warriors in this political and legal battle are “mainstream” homosexual groups. Robert Knight and Frank York of the Family Research Council have thoroughly documented this in a report. “As far back as 1972, the National Coalition of Gay Organizations adopted a ‘gay rights platform’ that included a demand to ‘repeal all laws governing the age of sexual consent.’”

It is homosexual activists within the United Nations who are lobbying to give sexual rights to underage children. In England, the campaign is being led by Outrage! and Stonewall, both homosexual organizations. The Dutch homosexual group, Association for the Integration of Homosexuality, has succeeded in lowering the age of legal sex to twelve in Holland. Assisting them was another homosexual group, the COC, which stated:

The liberation of pedophilia must be viewed as a gay issue . . . [and that] ages of consent should therefore be abolished . . . by acknowledging the affinity between homosexuality and pedophilia, the COC has quite possible made it easier for homosexual adults to become more sensitive to the erotic desires of younger members of their sex, thereby broadening gay identity.

In Canada, the effort is led by homosexual activist and NAMBLA defender Gerald Hannon. In America, aside from NAMBLA, the effort is supported by most of the major homosexual organizations such as the National Gay Task Force. Indeed, the annual homosexual “March on Washington” invariably releases a “statement of demands” which includes abolishing age of consent laws. Homosexuals in Hawaii have already successfully lowered the age of consent there to fourteen. To be frank, it is difficult to find an advocate of lowering the age of consent laws in the United States or elsewhere who is not a homosexual activist.

What then does the academic literature say about the relationship between homosexuality and child molestation? Quite a bit, actually. Scientific studies confirm a strong pedophilic predisposition among homosexuals.

Family Research Institute founder and psychologist Paul Cameron, reviewing more than nineteen different academic reports and peer reviewed studies in a 1985 Psychological Reports article, found that homosexuals account for between 25% and 40% of all child molestation. Sex researchers Freund, Heasman, Racansky, and Glancy, for example, in an 1984 Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy article, put the number at 36%. Erickson, Walbek, Sely, in a 1988 Archives of Sexual Behavior article, places it at 86% when the children being molested are male.

However, it should be noted that homosexuals account for only 2% of the population which statistically means that a child molester is ten to twenty times more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual. In other words, heterosexual molestations proportionally are a fraction compared to homosexual molestations. More recent studies confirm this statistic. In 2000, the Archives of Sexual Behavior published an article by seven sex researchers concluding that ‘‘around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles.”

Sexual violence expert and professor of psychiatry Eugene Abel, in a 1987 study published by the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, concluded that homosexuals sexually molest young boys with an incidence that is five times greater than the molestation of girls.

In a 1992 study published in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, sex researchers K. Freud and R. I. Watson found that homosexual males are three times more likely than straight men to engage in pedophilia and that the average pedophile victimizes between 20 and 150 boys before being arrested.
Other data has come to the forefront confirming that sex with young boys is a way of life for many homosexuals. In 1993, the United States Army, Office of Judge Advocate, issued a study that analyzed 102 court martial convictions having to do with soldiers involved in homosexual acts over a four-year period. The study found that in 47% of the cases, homosexual men victimized a youth.

A content analysis of molestation stories by the Family Research Institute involving five major newspapers found around 40% involved homosexuals, but this number is low due to the fact that many reporters will not report if a child molester is homosexual even if he knows that to be the case.

A study by sex researchers Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg found that 25% of white gay men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger. The Family Research Institute conducted a similar study and found that “11 times more gays than exclusively heterosexual men reported sex with a man while they were under the age of 13.” A study by homosexual activists and researchers Jay and Young revealed that 73% of homosexuals surveyed had sex with boys sixteen to nineteen years of age or younger.

In a study on male rape published by the American Journal of Psychiatry, it was found that 6% of rape victims reported to a Philadelphia rape crisis center were boys under sixteen years old. And women are not raping them.

This type of behavior, however, is considered normal in psychiatric circles due to the influence of homosexual psychiatrists within the American Psychiatric Association. It is the homosexual caucus within that body that pushed to rewrite the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia. The new definition defines sex with children as a psychological disorder only if it causes “clinically significant distress” for the molester! Under that definition, most molesters are perfectly normal people!

The American Psychological Association appears to have similar sympathies when it published a sloppy and error-filled article in its Psychological Bulletin in July 1998, arguing that there is no research documenting that sexual child abuse is harmful to children and that “a willing encounter with positive reactions would be labeled simply adult-child sex” instead of using terms such as child abuse and victim. There was no outcry from the homosexual community. Indeed, they either remained silent or publicly defended the article. One of the nation’s most prominent homosexual journalists, Andrew Sullivan, attacked critics of the study in the New York Times. In the National Journal, gay journalist Jonathan Rauch strongly defended the study and argued that child molestation should be called “adult-adolescent sex.”

The epidemic in male child molestation occurring simultaneously with the rise of an aggressive homosexual subculture is not coincidental. Due to the AIDS virus, molestation is often a death sentence. Further, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 50% of male AIDS victims reported having sex with an adult male by the age of 16, and 20% had sex with an adult male by the age of 10.

The Center of Disease Control (CDC) recently reported that as of the year 2000, there are now 31,293 AIDS cases in the 13-24-age category. The HIV/AIDs Surveillance Reports maintained by the CDC demonstrate that for the last few years around half of the age group 13-24 HIV victims were infected with the disease as a result of sex with adult men. However, one must bear in mind that due to the incubation period of the HIV/AIDS disease, many of these boys and young men were infected as long as ten years previous to the reporting of their cases. This translates into roughly 15,000 boys that have been infected by adult men since the CDC started to compile this information. This is an epidemic no one seems to want to talk about.

Indeed, the response instead has been an escalating effort by the homosexual community to compromise every major youth group possible and to inundate our public schools with pro-homosexual curricula, counseling, and social activities. The YMCA, Girl Scouts, and the Big Brothers, despite also being plagued by molestation incidents, have all capitulated to homosexual pressure campaigns. Indeed, Girl Scout leaders writing in the 1997 book, On My Honor: Lesbians Reflect on their Scouting Experience, reveal that the Girl Scouts are inundated with lesbians─a third of its professional staff is lesbian─and they have even initiated a lesbian mentoring program! The Boy Scouts now stand alone among America’s major youth groups in resisting the homosexual agenda – and that explains why they are under such ferocious legal, legislative, and cultural attack.

Moreover, the liberal media omits any mention of a person’s homosexuality in covering molestation stories. This is reinforced by pressure from homosexual groups. The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLADD) disseminated a “media guide” to reporters nationwide in which they urge:

A criminal’s . . . sexual orientation is not always obvious (or relevant) based simply on the circumstances of a crime . . . . [A]s a rule avoid labeling an activity or emotion as “homosexual’’ unless you would call the same activity “heterosexual” or “straight” if engaged in by someone of another sexual orientation.

The homosexual community knows that the capture of all major youth groups is absolutely necessary to the expansion of its movement. They know what most social scientists and sex researchers know but refuse to talk about: homosexually-molested children are likely to become homosexual. After all, one of the most common characteristics of homosexual molesters is the fact that they were molested themselves during boyhood. An article published by the American Medical Association reported that, “Abused adolescents, particularly those victimized by males, were up to 7 times more likely to self-identity as gay or bisexual than peers who had not been abused.”

It is high time that America’s elected officials, health authorities, education leaders, and law enforcement officials act to not only tell the harsh truth─the homosexual community has targeted America’s youth─but act now to counter this horrible trend. Failure to do so will have disastrous consequences for both our culture and for the health of our children.

EDITORS NOTE: To print a downloadable copy of this white paper with references click here. This paper originally appeared in Regents University Law Review in 2002.

RELATED COLUMN: 5 Horrific Examples of Cultural Decay in America

Back to the Future – Gay Marriage

The Roman Empire was “ahead of its time,” establishing slavery-pedophilia and same-sex unions as the norm. Nero, the Roman emperor married at least two men in lavish public ceremonies, wearing a veil, and all the appearances of a traditional wedding: “dowry, marriage bed, torches, and witnesses.” According to Craig Turner, the Roman historian, Tacitus, described Nero’s engaging in coitus with the “groom” in full view of the wedding guests. He further described Nero’s deeds as engaging in “every filthy, depraved act, licit or illicit.”

During his infamous reign, Nero also rounded up Christians and tied them to stakes, burning them to light his garden. His penchant for violence included countless brutal executions, including that of his own mother. Not surprisingly, he committed suicide in 68 AD.

Gary DeMar sums up our current dilemma perfectly, when he says, “What stopped the moral disintegration was the spread of Christianity. It’s frightening to think that today, many Christians have sided with Nero.”

Traditional marriage and gay marriage are mutually exclusive and to remain silent is complicity. 41 states have voted to protect traditional marriage, but the “progressive” media, “emperor” Obama, and a handful of unelected Supreme court justices, are hell bent on forcing their will upon the American people.

The Book of books, outlining the structure for a well ordered civil society, and upon which our country was built, has given us the most prosperous and free country in history. People from all over the world have risked their lives to participate in our 200 + year “experiment” called liberty.

We have special protections for every segment of society, written into law, EXCEPT for Christians and heterosexuals. Will history repeat itself, or will we rise up and declare that we are, now and always, a Christian nation?

RELATED COLUMN: Questions You’re Asking About Cakes, Gays, and Religious Freedom

French Court Bans Performances of Anti-Semitic Comic Dieudonné

Pictured: French Anti-Semitic Comic Dieudonne’ and French Soccer star Nicolas Anelka in Nazi-like quenelle salute

French Court of the State re imposed a ban on the performance of controversial comic Dieudonne’ within minutes of an administrative tribunal decision in Nantes lifting it.   Dieudonné was in the midst of a tour of several major French cities, despite having over 9 convictions with penalties of $80,000 for violating French hate laws.  These violations are regarding his comments about the Holocaust and Jewish personalities that some, including his former Jewish comic sidekick, consider Anti-Semitic.  His performance in Nantes had been banned by a local French government official in furtherance public order issued by French Interior Minister Manuel Valls, Tuesday.  Valls said  today:

“This is a political battle and not just a legal one. We must not let these intolerable statements go unanswered.” The Socialist politician said Dieudonné’s anti-Semitic and racist outbursts were “not an opinion, but a felony” and underlined that “the action I have undertaken has the advantage of mobilizing everyone, including the offices of the State.”

On Tuesday French President Hollande said:

I am calling on all representatives of the state, particularly its prefects, to be on alert and inflexible. No one should be able to use this show for provocation and to promote openly anti-Semitic ideas.

A World Jewish Congress (WJC) report noted:

Earlier this week,  Interior Minister Valls said racial and anti-Semitic remarks in Dieudonné’s show were legal infractions and “no longer belong to the artistic and creative dimension”. In a three-page circular letter sent on Monday to prefects and mayors across France, Valls said that the show contained “disgraceful and anti-Semitic words toward Jewish personalities or the Jewish community” and “virulent and shocking attacks on the memory of victims of the Holocaust.”

[…]

World Jewish Congress Vice-President Roger Cukierman, the head of the French Jewish umbrella body CRIF, told ‘France Info’ radio on Tuesday morning that he was satisfied that the French government had now acted. He called on French citizens to speak out against Dieudonné’s anti-Semitism. “No, France is not an anti-Semitic country, but therefore, one has to put stop to [Dieudonné’s] actions and prosecute him wherever possible.” Cukierman is among eight persons and institutions against who Dieudonné has threatened a defamation suit.

Even a right wing Political Leader, Marnie Le Pen of the National Front, expressed “shock’ at Dieudonné’s behavior in remarks to Le Figaro, although hedging that perhaps the French government may have gone too far with this ban.

Much of the controversy surrounding Dieudonne arises from his use of an alleged pro-Nazi gesture, the quenelle.  The WJC report noted:

The ‘quenelle’ gesture – holding one hand to the chest or shoulder, with the other extended rigidly downward, [is] like a lowered Nazi salute. Dieudonné’s companion Noémie Montagne has patented the gesture, as well as the use of its name for beverages, a television network and a public relations company.

The quenelle gesture was used by Nicolas Anelka, French Soccer star of the West Bromwich Albion English Premier League Soccer, team when scoring goals in a West Ham match.  Anelka Tweeted: “This gesture was a special dedication to my friend Dieudonné.”That gave rise to a Tweet from French Sports Minister, Valerie Fourneyron, who called it “Provocative”.   A WJC report cited European Jewish Congress President Moshe Kantor  urging  football’s governing bodies to punish Anelka as if he “had made the infamous outstretched arm salute” of the Nazis.

Dieudonné’s  loyal followers believe today’s legal battles, denied him  free speech.  In the US it could e considered protected speech under the First Amendment upheld under several Supreme Court decisions, beginning with the Brandenburg v. Ohio decision in 1969.

Prior to the reinstatement  today of the ban by the French Court of State, Dieudonné’s counsel Jacques Verdiersaid  was  cited by AFP  hastily saying:

 The judge’s ruling amounted to a “total victory”. A statement from the court said it did not regard the show as having “an attack on human dignity as its main object”.

Over 5,600 held tickets to the performance at the Zenith Theater in Nantes. Mayors in Bordeaux, Marseilles and Tours have banned Dieudonne’s performances in response to the order from French President Hollande and Interior Minister Valls.

Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala is the son of a French mother and Cameroonian father. He has made a career engaging in anti-Semitic references about the Holocaust, international Jewish control and inventing a Nazi-like gesture, the quenelle, mimicked by his followers. He has courted both far-right and far-left groups, as well as African and Muslim émigré communities in France.  Dieudonné had a Jewish partner, Eli Semour,  on TV and live performances. Dieudonné would appear in a KKK white sheet costume, while Semour would be decked out in a Nazi SS uniform. That was years ago. Now Semour is appalled at the depths of his former partner’s anti-Semitic routines.

One example of Dieudonne’s attacks on Jewish personalities was the case of French radio personality Patrick Cohen. The Wall Street Journal in its coverage of the most recent Dieudonné contretemps reported:

The latest controversy began last month, when state television channel France 2 broadcast footage captured by a hidden camera and showing Dieudonné commenting about French-Jewish radio anchor Patrick Cohen during a private performance.

“Me, you see, when I hear Patrick Cohen speak, I think to myself: Gas chambers…too bad,” the comedian was shown saying on stage. Dieudonné’s lawyers don’t dispute the video’s veracity.

Dieudonné’s remarks followed a previous remark by Mr. Cohen on a TV show that he was against hosting a number of “sick brains” in his morning radio shows, listing Dieudonné among others.

Later in December, Paris prosecutors said they had launched a preliminary probe against Dieudonné. In a TV interview, Mr. Cohen said he wouldn’t comment on the legal process. Dieudonné says the latest episode shows that France’s mainstream media has double standards over alleged racism.

“When it’s about blacks, people laugh, nobody bothers even though the pain and the misery are at least as deep,” Dieudonné said in a video posted on his YouTube channel.

Coinciding with this breaking news on Dieudonné and rising French Antisemitism, we interviewed yesterday Michel Gurfinkiel.  He is French journalist, author, founder and President of the Jean-Jacques Rousseau Institute, a conservative  think-thank in France. He is a Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at the Middle East Forum.    Among issues covered in the conversation were French Jewry, rising anti-Semitism, French government initiatives and multi-cultural and Muslim émigré problems including the current controversy over Dieudonné.

At one point in our conversation we discussed a separate initiative by the Hollande government that was controversial. This was a draft posted on the government’s website directed at cultivating the anti-racist, African and Muslim émigré voting constituencies. The draft fostered recognition of multi-cultural origins of these groups effectively denying integration with French history, language and cultural values.  The ruckus the proposal caused led to the withdrawal of the draft.  Gurfinkiel characterized it as one more step towards national suicide. Meanwhile, he noted that young French Jews are increasingly committed towards aliyah to Israel, while others are moving into predominately safer Christian areas in France.  As Gurfinkiel put it, French Jewry, transformed by Holocaust survivors and émigrés expelled from former French Muslim possessions and other Islamic countries, feel threatened.  The Dieudonné episode is another expression of that threat.

Look for more insights from Gurfinkiel in our interview with him in the February 2014 edition of the NER.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Debunking 5 Common Arguments for Homosexuality

Whenever a person of high visibility dares express disagreement with homosexuality, several things will happen, and of this you may be sure: 1) Other celebrities will be quick to react with horror, disavowing the person and their remarks; 2) Whatever professional entities with which the person is associated (corporate/political/entertainment/sports) will go public with a carefully worded promise to appropriately “deal” with the individual and the situation; and 3) Cries of “homophobic” will be heaped on the person who spoke blasphemy against this key doctrine of our State religion, “Hyper-tolerant, Enforced-When-Necessary, Relativism.”

It matters not on what grounds one’s disagreement with homosexuality is based: A person may disagree with the homosexual agenda for moral, religious, philosophical, sociological, academic, or medical reasons; It doesn’t matter. According to most currently holding seats of cultural leadership, any and all disagreement is rooted in homophobia. Bill O’Reilly’s recent castigation of Phil Robertson is a case in point, though nothing in Robertson’s remarks indicated that his convictions and opinions about this moral and spiritual issue are borne out of fear. The campaign to “mainstream homosexuality at any cost” is an equal opportunity accuser: No matter who you are, no matter how logical your reasoning, dissent on this issue is homophobia.

If, like Phil Robertson, you reference the Bible in your opposition to homosexuality, news shows will bring on a religion “expert” to explain that your take on Scripture is wrong (The Bible doesn’t really say that homosexual sex is a sin; Those ancient pages speaking of God and His Word as unchanging and fixed, somehow just must have meant “eternal” when speaking of His love, yet “temporary” and “changing” when speaking of revealed moral boundaries). Big media,long ago sold out to the gay agenda, does not let appeals to Scripture go unchallenged. But scholarly spin can’t eradicate the fact that Scripture speaks with unmistakable clarity regarding human sexuality and marriage. And without question, the Bible presents same-sex activity as being sinful.

Sound Reasoning That Supports Biblical Truth 

While I believe that compelling lines of evidence point to the inspiration and authority of Scripture, I know that many people today don’t view the Bible as authoritative (just quote the Bible on most college campuses, and you will quickly learn this firsthand). But even apart from Scriptural prohibitions against homosexuality, there are compelling extra-biblical arguments against homosexuality. Let’s examine the typical arguments for homosexuality, and we’ll weave in arguments from the opposing camp as we go.

“Homosexuality Doesn’t Harm Anyone”

Those who support the view that homosexuality does not cause any harm are really basically saying, “Mind your own business!” According to this position, homosexuality harms no one and, therefore, is perfectly acceptable. But if it can be demonstrated that homosexuality does have negative results, then the claim that it doesn’t harm anyone is false. Those who oppose homosexuality add that homosexuality does cause harm, especially when it comes to the spiritual condition of the person in question.

“Consenting Adults Can Do What They Want”
Proponents of homosexuality often claim that homosexuality is a matter of personal choice between consenting parties. But this claim is sort of just another way of stating the homosexuality-doesn’t-harm-anyone argument. As has been explained, though, it’s possible that it does cause harm, to individuals and to culture. It should be added that given moral law, consensual behavior does not automatically mean that the behavior is morally valid.

“Morality Can’t Be Legislated”

Supporters of homosexuality typically argue that morality cannot be legislated—there is no point in trying to legislate morality, so don’t bother. But anyone with any sense of what’s going on in the world— anyone who even only occasionally listens to the news—knows that in some way someone is always trying to legislate morality. People only consider any given piece of legislation worthwhile, however, if it encourages a version of morality that they support! And if morality can’t be legislated, then homosexual activists shouldn’t bother trying to legalize same-sex marriage.

“Homosexuals Can’t Escape Genetics”

Some supporters of homosexuality argue that some people are simply born with homosexual tendencies and no matter what they do, they can’t change that fact, so leave them alone and stop trying to “cure” them and branding them as deviant. But there are serious problems with the theory that homosexuality is genetic rather than learned. For example, if homosexuality is genetic, how have the responsible genes been passed from generation to generation? After all, homosexuals can’t pass anything on because they don’t reproduce.  Furthermore, if sexual orientation is fixed from birth, why do some homosexuals switch to heterosexuality or bisexuality?

“Opponents to Homosexuality are Just Intolerant and Narrow-Minded”

Some supporters of homosexuality accuse those who oppose homo- sexuality of simply being out of touch, bigoted and prejudiced. This, though, really isn’t an argument in favor of homosexuality. Rather, it’s a sentiment that suggests that opponents to homosexuality are unwilling to share their freedom. Unfortunately, this neglects the question of truth. The question isn’t about whether a particular emotional reaction to a particular behavior is correct but whether or not the particular behavior is right, given the available evidence.

Historically speaking, for example, every single culture that has compromised the traditional view of the family, embracing practices such as homosexuality, has not survived. Based on this evidence alone, a case can be made for the traditional view—opposition to homosexuality—simply on the basis of historical evidence.

The Importance of Standing for Truth

How important is it that our nation rediscover the Biblical position on moral issues (such as homosexuality)?  Extremely so, because the souls of people hang in the balance. Further, aberrant views about sexuality and the nature of family that rising generations hear in state-run classrooms are reinforced by influential celebrities. The rigorous (but necessary) work of meaningful discourse is obstructed when talking heads like Bill O’Reilly paint all opposition with the single-brush accusation of “homophobia.”

As our nation wrestles with this issue–and as well-funded, well-organized, tireless propagandizers condition the culture to embrace homosexuality–we’d do best to approach one another with love, gentleness and respect as we share what makes the most sense in light of God’s Word (and good sense).

EDITORS NOTE: Adapted from Alex McFarland’s 15th and newest book, “10 Issues that Divide Christians,” published by Regal Books, Ventura, California, available January 2014. Dr. Alex McFarland is an author, evangelist, educator and broadcaster. He has spoken in more than 1400 churches, and on more than 150 universities and school campuses.  He is founder of the Alliance for the Preservation of Christianity in America. Learn more at: www.alexmcfarland.com 

RELATED COLUMN: 5 Horrific Examples of Cultural Decay in America

Trail Life USA Announces New Staff for 2014

Trail Life USA is kicking off 2014 with additional staff for the long-anticipated rollout of their exciting national youth outdoor adventure program.

mark hancock

Mark Hancock, a founding Board Member.

Mark Hancock, a founding Board Member and the Host/Director of Trail Life USA‘s Inaugural National Convention in September, steps into the role of Chief Operating Officer. He will oversee Trail Life USA’s operations, currently virtual. He began his career founding a national advertising agency and holds two Masters Degrees in the Mental Health Counseling field, having spent a number of years in private practice, and has taught at secular and Christian colleges. An award-winning writer and international conference speaker, he lives with his wife and two sons in Port Orange, Florida. “I’m excited about the energy behind Trail Life USA, and the great future it holds for raising godly men. Our leadership team is strong and committed to building and maintaining an excellent program. Boys will love the adventure; parents will love the Christ-honoring character and leadership focus,” Hancock said.

bob green

Interim Executive Director Rob Green (SC)

Interim Executive Director Rob Green (SC) will shed the “interim” title to serve as the National Director of Field Operations. Rob stated, “Trail Life USA is moving forward in the right direction. The Board and staff are positioned to grow and oversee a thriving and life-impacting program. I am honored to be a part of developing a national movement of this magnitude.”

richard mathews

General Counsel Richard Mathews (TX)

General Counsel Richard Mathews (TX) retains his title, but adds “National Director of Administration” to his list. His extensive legal and operational background in the field brings a wealth of experience. “I feel incredibly blessed to be a part of a program where I can contribute to teaching youth strong values in an adventure-filled program with others equally committed to the timeless values upon which this nation was built.”

Other staff additions include Laura Burton (FL), National Program Coordinator; Carolyn Culbertson (SC), National Field Support Coordinator; Eric Dickens (FL), Executive Assistant to COO, and finance support personnel.

The newest tool in our box is the Troop Locator.

This is designed to let you know where Troops are popping up. Many of these are in the chartering stage, which means they are completing their background checks or Child and Youth Safety Training so, for safety purposes, we can’t give you all the details. But if you’d like them to contact you when they are ready, leave your information.

If there is not a Troop where you want one, consider chartering or, at least, leave your information and someone will contact you when there is interest or a team begins to develop.

Here’s the link: Troop Locator

ABOUT TRAIL LIFE USA

Trail Life USA is a Christian adventure, character, and leadership program for young men. The K-12 program centers on outdoor experiences that build a young man’s skills and allow him to grow on a personal level and as a role model and leader for his peers. Living the Trail Life is a journey established on timeless values derived from the Bible.

Christian Alternative to the Boy Scouts of America Launched

On Wednesday, January 1, 2014, Trail Life USA (TLUSA) officially launched its outdoor adventure program for boys and young men nationwide. TLUSA is a Christian scouting-like program for boys and young men ages 5-24.  The program focuses on outdoor adventure, character, and leadership and is starting with approximately 500 troops in 42 states.

Trail Life USA is being birthed on the same day that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) officially implements its new membership policy of allowing “open and avowed” homosexual youth in their program. Around 60% of the new members of TLUSA are former members of the BSA and 40% have no BSA background.

Adults members of TLUSA are required to sign a Christian statement of faith and values, undergo Child and Youth Safety Protection Training, submit to background checks, and provide letters of recommendation from pastors that know the applicants.

However, the program will have an inclusion policy for youth members and will welcome families with boys from all faiths (or no faith) to participate in this unapologetically Christian outdoor adventure program.

TLUSA Chief Operating Officer, Mark Hancock, commented, “We could not be more excited about the organic growth and the explosion of interest we are seeing every day all across the country. There is a real need for a program that parents can trust to help them guide their sons to honor God, lead with integrity, serve others, and experience outdoor adventure.”

Chairman of the TLUSA Board, John Stemberger, is an Eagle Scout and a former scoutmaster with the BSA.  He had two sons in Boy Scouts last year and removed them from the program.  Describing the Trail Life USA program to parents and pastors Stemberger has stated, “This is not another church program to compete with Bible studies or youth groups.  TLUSA is a masculine outdoor program that has the potential to change a young man’s life forever.  Boys will love the fun and adventure-parents will love the focus on character and leadership.”

For more information, or to sign up to become a member or leader within Trail Life USA, go to www.TrailLifeUSA.com.

Billy Graham’s son Franklin: Homosexuality is ‘a sin,’ and ‘I want to warn people’

“In a Meet the Press interview Sunday, Franklin Graham, the son of famed preacher Billy Graham, refused to back down from his Biblical stance against homosexuality. “It’s sin,” he said, and added that he wanted to warn people about it because they will have to stand before God who will judge,” Life Site News reports.

The younger Graham was speaking in the NBC interview about his father’s legacy, as the elder Graham, 95, is ‘very weak’ and eating little. He described how he helped to arrange a final sermon for his father that aired in November. He felt it was God’s will that he help his father “finish well.”

In the context of about Pope Francis’ “who am I to judge” comment, Franklin Graham was asked if he would shift his position on “gays.”

“God would have to shift, and God doesn’t,” Graham replied. “God’s word is the same yesterday and today and a million years from now, that it’s sin.”

“To wink at sin, and to tell somebody that it’s okay, I know the consequences of what will happen one day when they have to stand before God,” Graham continued. “I want to warn people.”

But, he added, “I think the Pope is right when he says he is not the judge. He is not the judge. God is the judge.”

Graham’s stance is the same as that of the Catholic Church.  A Vatican document on the pastoral care of homosexual persons notes that, “There can be no doubt of the moral judgement made there against homosexual relations.” The document, written under John-Paul II and signed by Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict), notes that the Bible “in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.”

That 1986 Vatican document also encourages speaking out on the immorality of homosexual activity as the younger Graham has done.  “No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral,” it says.

The document stresses, “we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral.” It adds: “Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.”

For Graham, it’s also a matter of truth. “I’ve never really been one to try to be politically correct,” he said. “I just feel truth is truth, and sometimes I probably offend some people.”

Click “like” if you support TRADITIONAL marriage.

RELATED COLUMN: 5 Horrific Examples of Cultural Decay in America

SaveCalifornia.com Urges Rose Parade Boycott: “Live gay wedding” turns parade into political stunt!

Don, one of our readers, forwarded this press release to me with the following comment:

I had an initial reaction to the news that the Tournament of Roses was including a float that would be featuring a ‘gay wedding’ live during the Rose parade, but then I got to thinking.

On second thought … I love diversity and it may be time to totally embrace it. Can’t wait until the Rose parade has a float to celebrate bigamy and polygamy once the civil rights of those multi-spousal families get sorted out in court. It will be GREAT. Then, a few more years down the road, I will be totally excited when NAMBLA has a float, and we can watch young boys and their older lovers broadcast all over America in the continuing celebration of diversity. And won’t it be great when there is a BDSM float…we can watch as people whip each other into a sexual frenzy. Can’t wait. Way to go Tournament of Roses. Let’s all look forward to the day when we can TRULY celebrate ALL diversity.

Should you find my comment above offensive, I apologize.  Rarely do I send such content via email.

Sacramento, California — A leading pro-family organization, SaveCalifornia.com, is calling for a boycott of the Jan. 1st Rose Parade due to its in-your-face promotion of homosexual “marriage” to children.

But should you find the actions by the Tournament of Roses to be concerning, I encourage you to contact them today to politely share your thoughts.  Their direct number is626-449-4100.  Additionally, see the attached info below.

“Many parents and grandparents are appalled that the Rose Parade is being turned from a family-friendly parade into an offensive political stunt forced upon children who are watching,”said Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, which promotes moral virtues for the common good. “SaveCalifornia.com is urging dads, moms and grandparents to boycott the Rose Parade, cancel plans to watch or attend, voice their opposition to tournament officials, and not do business with sponsors listed at tournamentofroses.com.”

“The Rose Parade was founded upon the reality of God’s beautiful creation of flowers and plants that decorate exquisite floats, to the delight of children and families,” Thomasson said. “Now, with a ‘live gay wedding’ on a float, the Rose Parade has turned against God’s natural design of sex and family.”

This year’s AIDS Healthcare Foundation float will feature a “live wedding” between two homosexual men. “Children watching will be taught that homosexual behavior is good and normal, when it’s not biologically based, results in a high rate of HIV/AIDS and other STDs, and squashes religious freedom, free speech, and other constitutional rights,” Thomasson said. (Source: SaveCalifornia.com’s “Not Born This Way”)

“The float’s slogan, ‘Love Is The Best Protection,’ is false advertising that hurts children,” Thomasson said. “The fact is, the promotion of homosexual behavior, including same-sex ‘marriages,’ in our culture has increased sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS. And male homosexuals in ‘committed’ relationships are notorious for having ‘open relationships,’ which enlarge the circle of transmission.”

DOCUMENTATION FROM MYTH 10 OF “THE TEN TOP MYTHS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY,” PUBLISHED BY FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL (2010):

Myth No. 10: Homosexual relationships are just the same as heterosexual ones, except for the gender of the partners.

Fact: Homosexuals are less likely to enter into a committed relationship, less likely to be sexually faithful to a partner, even if they have one, and are less likely to remain committed for a lifetime, than are heterosexuals.

Homosexual men and women are far less likely to be in any kind of committed relationship than heterosexuals are. A 2006 study by researchers at UCLA concluded: We found that lesbians, and particularly gay men, are less likely to be in a relationship compared to heterosexual women and men. Perhaps the most outstanding finding is also the most simple-that over half of gay men (51%) were not in a relationship. Compared to only 21% of heterosexual females and 15% of heterosexual males, this figure is quite striking.(77)

Secondly, even homosexuals (especially men) who are in a partnered relationship are much less likely to be sexually faithful to that partner.

  • A Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a “steady partner” had an average of eight sexual partners per year.(78)
  • A Canadian study of homosexual men who had been in committed relationships lasting longer than one year found that only 25 percent of those interviewed reported being monogamous. According to study author Barry Adam, “Gay culture allows men to explore different . . . forms of relationships besides the monogamy coveted by heterosexuals.”(79)

A 2005 study in the journal Sex Roles found that “40.3% of homosexual men in civil unions and 49.3% of homosexual men not in civil unions had ‘discussed and decided it is ok under some circumstances’ to have sex outside of the relationship. By comparison, only 3.5% of heterosexual married men and their wives agreed that sex outside of the relationship was acceptable.”(80)

Finally, research shows that homosexual relationships tend to be of shorter duration and much less likely to last a lifetime than heterosexual ones (especially heterosexual marriages). A 2005 journal article cites one large-scale longitudinal study comparing the dissolution rates of heterosexual married couples, heterosexual cohabiting couples, homosexual couples, and lesbian couples:

On the basis of the responses to the follow-up survey, the percentage of dissolved couples was 4% (heterosexual married couples), 14% (heterosexual cohabiting couples), 13% (homosexual couples) and 18% (lesbian couples).(81)

In other words, the dissolution rate of homosexual couples during the period of this study was more than three times that of heterosexual married couples, and the dissolution rate of lesbian couples was more than four-fold that of heterosexual married couples.(82)

Myth 10 – footnotes:

77  Charles Strohm, et al., “Couple Relationships among Lesbians, Gay Men, and Heterosexuals in California: A Social Demographic Perspective,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal Convention Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, (Aug 10, 2006): 18. Accessed at: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p104912_index.html

78  Maria Xiridou, et al, “The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam,” AIDS 17 (2003): 1031.

79  Ryan Lee, “Gay Couples Likely to Try Non-monogamy, Study Shows,” Washington Blade (August 22, 2003): 18

80  Sondra E. Solomon, Esther D. Rothblum, and Kimberly F. Balsam, “Money, Housework, Sex, and Conflict: Same-Sex Couples in Civil Unions, Those Not in Civil Unions, and Heterosexual Married Siblings,” Sex Roles 52 (May 2005): 569.

81  Lawrence Kurdek, “Are Gay and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples Really Different from Heterosexual Married Couples?” Journal of Marriage and Family 66 (November 2004): 893.

82  Ibid., 896.

ABOUT SAVECALIFORNIA.COM

SaveCalifornia.com is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization standing strong for moral virtues for the common good. We represent children and families in the areas of marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education.

MassResistance helps Jamaica confront “Gay Agenda”

On International Human Rights Day, December 10, 2013, MassResistance went to Jamaica and delivered a stirring speech at a pro-family rally in Kingston, warning citizens about the slippery slope effects that would come with legalizing homosexual behavior, now being considered by the Jamaican government. The speech was broadcast live over national radio.

The homosexual movement wanted to use International Human Rights Day strictly to promote their cause. But these Jamaicans had another plan!

I was the main speaker at the rally, held in Emancipation Park in Kingston by the Jamaican Coalition for a Healthy Society (JCHS). Over 400 people attended.

I outlined — point by point — the progression that followed once homosexuality was legalized everywhere else — and would surely happen in Jamaica. After legalization comes: gay pride parades; non-discrimination laws; homosexuals’ adoption of children; the homosexual agenda in schools; forcing “gay marriage” on society; public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems; the transgender agenda; large-scale loss of free speech; ban on counseling for kids with homosexual issues; and attacks on churches.

Over four hundred Jamaicans came to the rally Emancipation Park, an evening event before a brightly lit stage.

After the presentation, one Jamaican activist emailed us: “Your arrival here was timely and most appreciated. The feedback from your talk continued on radio the next day and I know that the MC of the show certainly was shocked to discover what has been taking place.”

The Jamaican people are not afraid to wear their religion on their sleeve — or on their shirt!

Besides my keynote speech, the 2½ hour event included songs, dances, and several powerful speeches about morality and God’s laws. The attendees were very enthusiastic and energetic on this issue. At the end of the event, they eagerly commenced a nationwide petition drive to stop the legalization efforts.

As the rally ended, people started gathering signatures on a national petition to keep the current law intact.

By many accounts, the MassResistance speech was a big boost for the pro-family battle going on right now in Jamaica.

Outrage over push to overturn Jamaica’s “Buggery Law”

At issue is a recent push to overturn the country’s 150-year-old law against homosexual behavior. The statute (Sec. 76 of the Crimes Against Persons Act) is universally known in Jamaica as “the Buggery Law,” after the British terminology. Jamaica is one of about a dozen Caribbean countries where anti-sodomy laws are currently on the books.

Prime Minister’s announcement. In early June 2013, Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller announced that she is considering having the Parliament take a “conscience vote” on a review of the Buggery Law during the current legislative session which ends March 31, 2014.

This is widely seen as a reaction to growing pressure from the Obama Administration and the Cameron Administration in Britain to force Jamaica to promote “LGBT rights.” This has included threats from both countries to withhold foreign aid to nations like Jamaica that continue to hold the line.

Supreme Court case. In addition, this past June the country’s Supreme Court agreed to hear a case by a homosexual activist claiming that the Buggery Law violates Jamaica’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. The case began October 4th and is continuing.

The sense that we get talking to Jamaicans who’ve been following the case closely is that the homosexuals have a very weak legal case and a slim chance of succeeding (unlike in other countries).

Strong pro-family outcry from churches and groups

Jamaica has a very strong religious community, and churches and pro-family groups have been very active in opposing any change to the law. They have seen what has happened in other countries such as the U.S. and fear that this would be the beginning of a total assault on the Jamaican culture.

Compared to the United States and other countries, church groups and pro-family activists have been very outspoken and pretty fearless in opposition to the homosexual agenda. There have been pro-family marches, speeches, media appearances, newspaper ads, and a general political awakening to the issue. Church groups are also directly involved in the Supreme Court case.

Jamaican homosexual movement much weaker than in U.S.

On the other hand, since homosexuality is technically illegal the homosexual groups are relatively weak and not able to intimidate and harass the way they can in other places. Sadly, much of the homosexual movement’s funding and support in Jamaica comes from the US government and also through the United Nations, which outrages many Jamaicans.

In addition, since Jamaica has never had homosexuality pushed in the schools or in their island culture, the public has not been swayed on this issue as in other places.

Public relations war starts

Nevertheless, Jamaican homosexuals have begun a fairly strong public-relations campaign in the media to support repeal of the Buggery Law, with their own op-ed articles, letters to the editor, advertisements, banners, and more. Much of it appears to be funded by various United Nations organizations.

Their main points have included: (1) “Loving” someone else is an international human right. (2) Criminalizing homosexuality causes a stigma and keeps homosexuals from getting “safe sex” help, thus more AIDS is caused. (3) There is violence against homosexuals triggered by the current Buggery Law.

This slick full-page ad by the homosexual movement appeared in Jamaican newspapers, meant to soften the public on the “human rights” and “justice” aspects of repealing the Buggery Law. Note the logos for United Nations-affiliated groups on the bottom, which appear to be funding this campaign.

The pro-family groups and churches strongly dispute all of those points. Among other things, they point out the overwhelming loss of religious freedom and freedom of speech, and the actual statistics on disease. And there is very strong evidence that the overwhelming amount of violence against homosexuals in Jamaica is committed by other homosexuals.

For a larger view click on the chart.

Countering the lies. The Jamaican homosexual movement says that the current Buggery Law causes more AIDS. But the  JCHS research reveals that in fact the opposite is true.

JCHS pro-family coalition confronting the “gay PR” campaign!

Much of the pro-family public relations battle has been taken on by the Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society (JCHS). They have been relentless in getting out the truth in the face of a constant flood of disinformation and absurd emotion. In our opinion, JCHS has been a model for the rest of us.

Based in Kingston, they have a fearless and uncompromising attitude, that is all too rare these days on our side. In addition, they have a superb command of the facts and are willing to engage in the often hostile mainstream media, as well as other media.

JCHS energetically covers more ground than almost anyone we’ve seen around the world. Just before Camenker’s visit, the organization released an outstanding 55-minute video that covers the broad range of moral, legal, and medical issues surrounding homosexuality, and also includes man-on-the-street interviews with regular Jamaicans.

VIDEO: This outstanding 55-minute video by JCHS covers the broad range of issues regarding the Buggery Law repeal:

The group’s chairman is Dr. Wayne West, who takes on the destructive medical problems surrounding homosexual behavior and similar issues. There has been a constant effort by the Left to ignore and obfuscate the vast personal and public health effects connected with homosexuality, especially when their political agenda is being pushed. Dr. West cuts through that.

Dr. West has been brilliant in his media work. In this recent newspaper interview,he also takes on the outrageous use of the term “homophobia” to label pro-family citizens as being mentally ill because of their beliefs.

Dr. West fearlessly takes on the issues.

Dr. West has been behind most of the group’s newspaper advertisements and other public statements. At the Emancipation Park rally (see video at top), he introduced Brian Camenker of MassResistance.

The other major JCHS figure is Shirley Richards, an attorney and past president of Jamaica’s Christian Legal Fellowship. She has been outspoken in the media about the legal and moral issues surrounding homosexuality. 

She also has excellent media skills. In this recent newspaper op-ed article, Mrs. Richards takes apart the Left’s argument that the Buggery Law is a violation of international human rights.

Great video. Mrs. Richards also unafraid to confront the threats by the United States and Britain to cut off aid to countries who refuse to cave in to the homosexual agenda. In this great (and short) video she stands up to that manipulation and boldly tells the truth about what the homosexual lifestyle will do to a society.

Great video featuring attorney Shirley Richards. She pulls no punches! (4:41)

[NOTE: This was posted on YouTube by a homosexual group!]

cameker jamaica

Attorney Shirley Richards (left) with Brian Camenker of MassResistance at the December 10th rally.

The Jamaicans are a people with a lot of common sense. Right now, if the buggery law were to be put to a national vote, it would be kept on the books by a wide margin. But people can see that the political pressure is growing, along with the money coming in to persuade and attempt to brainwash the citizens.

The Jamaicans told us over and over again that MassResistance’s message was exactly what they needed to fuel this battle. But to tell you the truth, we got just as much from them. It was a truly wonderful experience being among such fearless and uncompromising pro-family battlers.

ABOUT MASSRESISTANCE

MassResistance officially organized in 1995 as Parents’ Rights Coalition, although it had been active both locally and statewide since 1993. In 2003, under the name Article 8 Alliance, it expanded to issues surrounding the same-sex “marriage” court ruling and its effects in Massachusetts. In 2006, these efforts were consolidated under the new name “MassResistance.” We have been the leading pro-family grassroots activist group in Massachusetts.

The Porn Factor: The Path from Playboy to Sex Offender Is Well Traveled

In December 1953, Playboy magazine was launched and immediately began normalizing a new world order of autoerotic sexual fantasy. Hugh Hefner (until reading Kinsey in college, a virgin like most single young men) pledged that his “romantic” magazine would turn his “Playboy men” into skillful lovers, readying them for lifelong marriage. Yet his monthly magazine ridiculed virginity and marriage while glamorizing adultery and rape and showing consumers ways to trick women and children into illicit sex.

By 1969, millions of Playboy users, struggling with their unexpected, porn-induced “diminished arousal response,” began eagerly embracing the amplified stimuli offered by Penthouse. This gave us another generation of intimacy and potency challenged men. By 1974, millions of Penthouse users, struggling again with a diminished sexual response, turned to Hustler for help. Hello to yet another generation of arousal-challenged pornography addicts, millions of whom became pushovers for internet pornography. And the addicts were not just grown men. In 1979, psychologist Aaron Hass, in his book Teenage Sexuality, reported that Playboy was commonly sought by juveniles for sex information, advice, values, and mores.

Pornography and Pedophilia

From 1994 to 2007, at least 19 state legislatures in the U.S. passed laws named for a raped and murdered child. In my considered judgment, almost every lust-crime is now energized by pornography. There is plenty of evidence to back me up. For instance, in 1984, FBI Agent Ken Lanning testified about pedophiles’ use of pornography at
a Senate hearing on the “Effect of Pornography on Women and Children”:

Adult pornography is also used, particularly with adolescent boy victims, to arouse and to lower inhibitions  …  A child who is reluctant to engage in sexual activity with an adult or to pose for sexually explicit photos can sometimes be convinced by viewing other children having “fun” participating in the activity … A third major use of child pornography collections is [for] blackmail … If the child threatens to tell his or her parents or the authorities, the existence of sexually explicit photographs can be an effective silencer. The pedophile threatens to show the pictures to parents, friends, or teachers if the child reveals their secret.

John Rabun, then Deputy Director of the National Center for Missing Children, stated at one of the hearings:

100 percent of the arrested pedophiles, child pornographers, pimps, what have you . . . had in their possession at the time of arrest, adult pornography. . . . [It was used] for their own sexual arousal . . . [and] particularly for the pedophiles, was a form of self-validation, “it is OK because I see it in other places. It must be all right, it is published nationally . . .”

On September 16, 1987, before the Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families in the House of Representatives, legal counselor Alan Sears testified:

In child pornography cases in Los Angeles County, police officers testified that since they began to ask the question, over 95 percent of the children involved in that activity had had pornography used as part of the softening up or the inhibition-lowering process to seduce them and induct them into this activity … [A] substantial number of the men who go on to be abusers were abused children themselves. Pornography plays a significant role in the training of our young people to become sexual abusers.

Detective Lt. Darrell Pope, Commanding Officer of the Michigan State Police Sex Crime Unit, testified at the same hearing:

[I]n 1977, I did a research project where I looked at 38,000 case histories [of sex crimes] and found that 41 percent of those reports indicated that, in fact, pornographic materials were used just prior to or during the actual act. (emphasis added).

Pope interviewed hundreds of sex offenders about their porn use, and “almost to a man,” the reply was: “I used it for one of several reasons: One, to encourage me.” Pope went on:

I can remember talking to one young man who was 19 years old; he said, “It excited me and then I got to thinking about it and I wanted to know how it felt.” … He wanted to know how it felt to rape a woman and kill her … And when we arrested this young man and searched his home, we found a pornographic magazine depicting this very thing that he had done.

Feeding Deviancy 

Move up to 1988. In Thrill Killers: True Portrayals of America’s Most Vicious Murderers, Clifford Linedecker wrote:

[M]ost of the killers indulged themselves in violent and sadistic fantasies. Responding to a request to indicate their primary sexual interest, 81 percent of the men put pornography at the top of the list … I found overwhelming evidence of twisted sexual fantasizing, and addiction to pornography in the backgrounds of many of the killers profiled in this book.

By 1990, Dr. W. L. Marshall wrote in Criminal Neglect: Why Sex Offenders Go Free, that “there is mounting evidence that in susceptible men, the material [pornography] feeds and legitimizes their deviant sexual tendencies.”

And in 1997, John Douglas, an FBI serial-rape profiler, reported that serial-rape murderers are commonly found “with a large pornography collection, either store-bought or homemade … [O]ur research does show that certain types of sadomasochistic and bondageoriented material can fuel the fantasies of those already leaning in that direction.”
And in 2003, Vernon J. Geberth, former Commanding Officer of the Bronx Homicide Task Force, wrote the following in Sex Related Homicide and Death Investigations, a book that should be required reading for those involved in sex-crime analyses:

[M]any of these pornographic depictions … were actually the road map to the offenses that the perpetrators of sex crimes were committing. . . . [T]he plan was in the pornography . . . [it is] the fuel that acts as a catalyst for fantasy-driven behavior … [P]ornography plays an important part in violent sex crimes.

A Late Warning

Back in 1986, then U.S. Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop dubbed pornography a “crushing public health problem … a clear and present danger … blatantly anti-human. … We must oppose it as we oppose all violence and prejudice.” Koop was ignored. We now have the results of three generations of pornography use, arguably sufficient and necessary evidence to get us to start treating all pornography as a clear and present danger, harmful to women and children.

In the summer of 2013, Ariel Castro pled guilty to kidnapping and raping three women whom he held captive in his house in Ohio for a decade. When asked by a judge how good his English was, Castro replied that his comprehension was bad because “my addiction to pornography and my sexual problem has really taken a toll on my mind.” It also took a brutal toll on the lives of three women.

How much more evidence do we need?

Endnotes
1. The nineteen laws are listed in my book Sexual Sabotage (WND, 2010), pp. 299–300.
2. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-Eighth Congress, Second Session, “Oversight on Pornography, Magazines of a Variety of Courses, Inquiring into the Subject of Their Impact on Child Abuse, Child Molestation, and Problems of Conduct Against Women,” Aug. 8, Sept. 12 and 25, and Oct. 30, 1984 (US Government Printing Office, 1985), Serial No. J-98-133, pp. 43–44.
3. John Rabun, testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice, 9/12/84, pp. 133–134.
4. https://archive.org/stream/womenviolencelaw00unit/womenviolencelaw00unit_djvu.txt.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Clifford Linedecker, Thrill Killers: True Portrayals of America’s Most Vicious Murderers (PaperJacks, 1988).
8. W. L. Marshall. Criminal Neglect: Why Sex Offenders Go Free (Seal Books, 1990), pp. 156–157.
9. John Douglas, Journey Into Darkness (Pocket Star Books, 1997), p. 299.
10. C. Everett Koop, M.D., American Medical News (Oct. 10, 1986).
11. http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/26/justice/ohio-castro/index.html?iref=allsearch.

RELATED COLUMN: Federal government funded porn project | The Daily Caller