Featured Video

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

31 July 2010

Opinion: New Lesbian Parenting Study Makes Claims Unsupported by the Evidence

By A. Dean Byrd, PhD, MBA,MPH

July 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS) published byAmerican Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) offers the following conclusion: "Adolescents who have been reared in lesbian-mother families since birth demonstrate healthy psychological adjustment (p. 28)."

Authors Gartrell and Bos generalize their findings to the lesbian population at large, claiming their research offers "implications for - same-sex parenting" (p. 28). Making an enormous scientific leap, they conclude that their study provides scientific proof that there is "no justification for restricting access to reproductive technologies or child custody on the basis of the sexual orientation of the parents" (p. 34-35).

Implied, though not stated, is the notion that fathers are not necessary or important for the healthy development of children. This implication is a throwback to an article published in the American Psychologist in 1999 titled "Deconstructing the Essential Father." Like the authors of the American Psychologist article, Gartrell and Bos are on record as activists seeking public support for homosexual parenting.

However, a cursory review of this study (funded by the Gill Foundation and the Lesbian Health Fund of the Gay, Lesbian Medical Association) demonstrates significant flaws that most first-year graduate students would quickly recognize. Any reasonable observer would easily conclude that the authors overstated their findings and that in this instance, whatever external review process was utilized, was inadequate. Consider the following:

1. The problems inherent in any self-report study. The lesbian mothers' own reports that their children were well-adjusted were accepted by the study's authors uncritically. The authors should have clarified the limitation and usefulness of such qualitative, self-reported data in light of the fact that the lesbian parents knew that the study would be used to further their political cause; in contrast, the control group had no idea how their reports would be used. In addition, most mothers, lesbian or not, would likely report their children's adjustment in a favorable light. Outside observers such as the child's teachers or counselors, if consulted, could have offered a different perspective.

2. The lesbian parents were hardly typical parents: 93% were Caucasian. Most were college-educated (67%). Most were middle/upper class (82%). Eighty-five per cent were in professional or managerial roles. The control sample, however, had significantly more minorities; many more children from the South; they were very different in race composition and socioeconomic status; and the educational level of these mothers was unclear. A statistical adjustment for these differences could have been easily addressed. Had these differences been controlled, they might have been reduced, been proven negligible, or perhaps reversed.

3. The sample was far from random. Participants were recruited from gay and lesbian venues (i.e., lesbian pride events and lesbian newspapers in three major metropolitan areas - Boston, Washington. D.C. and San Francisco). Although the authors acknowledge the non-randomness of their subject pool and the potential problems this situation could pose, this limitation did not seem to limit their conclusions. As a result, a very strong case could be made for selection bias having invalidated the findings.

Despite the obvious study flaws, the authors offer the following generalization: "The NLLFS adolescents are well-adjusted, demonstrating more competencies and fewer behavioral problems than their peers in the normative American population (p.34)."

Notably absent was data about the sexual orientation of the adolescents or the preferences or expectations for the adolescents' sexual orientation (some of this data was, in fact, collected for the 10-year study). Was this data collected and simply dismissed?

Remarkably, the authors report that the relationship-dissolution rate for the lesbian couples was 48% at the 10-year mark and 56% at the 17-year mark. (The average duration of the relationship prior to dissolution was 12 years.) When compared to the relationship-dissolution rates of the biological heterosexual sisters of the lesbians, the rate of relationship breakup is nearly double for the lesbians.

Is the reader to conclude that dissolution of the parents' relationship has no effect upon the adjustment of the adolescents? This conclusion hardly fits the existing research.

Other research, perhaps even more interesting, was released about the same time as the NLLFS study - research conducted by Marquardt, Glenn and Clark, titled, "My Daddy's Name is 'Donor': A New Study of Young Adults Conceived Through Sperm Donation." The authors' conclusions included the following troubling negative factors: on average, young adults conceived through artificial insemination were more confused, felt more isolated from their families, were experiencing more psychic pain, and fared worse than a matched group of children who were conceived naturally in areas such as depression, delinquency and substance abuse. And the list goes on.

No research was cited in the Gartrell and Bos study regarding the outcomes of children conceived through sperm donation, when compared to children conceived through the natural union of a man and a woman. The authors address the issue of donor status in a very cursory fashion, almost dismissively.

It seems an interesting coincidence that earlier this year, another paper authored by Biblarz and Stacey (2010) offered a similar conclusion to that of Gartrell and Bos: "In fact, based strictly on the published science, one could argue that two women parent better on average than a woman and a man, or at least than a woman and a man with a traditional division of labor (p.17)."

Based on these two papers, could one really conclude that a double dose of mothering is superior to a mother and a father? If a double dose of mothering is superior to mother and a father, would it follow that a double dose of mothering is vastly superior to and actually contraindicates the placement of children in homes where mothering is absent (i.e., gay men)?

Nowhere do Gartrell and Bos cite the extensive research demonstrating the importance of gender complementarity to the healthy development of children. Nowhere do these authors cite the extensive, peer-reviewed literature on the importance of both mothering and fathering for the healthy development of children.

To Gartrell and Bos's credit, they do identify some of the reasons for what appears to be politically-motivated conclusions: "The study has implications - for the expert testimony provided by pediatricians on lesbian mother custody, and for public policies concerning same-sex parenting. (p. 34)."

What seems clear is that the flaws in this study render it unsuitable for anything other than the following brief description: "interesting." Gartrell and Blos' conclusions don't rise to the level of support for lesbian parenting that they would like. Certainly, this study does not merit inclusion in any expert witness testimony nor does it rise to the level of policy implications. Until such limitations are addressed and more rigorous research conducted, the sought after conclusions stated by the authors are without substantial scientific support.

Perhaps the study would be better titled, "Preconceived Conclusions Seeking Research Support" or "Activism Masquerading as Science: A Study Suitable for Scrutiny by Beginning Graduate Students."

Silverstein and Auerbach, authors of the "Deconstructing Fathers" article, offered the following disclaimer: "We acknowledge that our reading of the scientific literature supports our political agenda. Our goal is to generate public-policy initiatives that support men in their fathering role, without discriminating against women and same-sex couples. We are also interested in encouraging public policy that supports the legitimacy of diverse family structures, rather than privileging the two-parent, heterosexual, married family." (p. 399).

The same could be said of this study. Gartrell and Bos should have offered the same disclaimer as Silverstein and Auerbach. But they did not.


Biblarz, T.J. & Stacey, J. (2010). "How does the gender of parents matter?" Journal of Marriage and Family, February, p. 3-22.

Gartrell, N. and Bos, H. (2010). "US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study: Psychological Adjustment of 17-Year-Old Adolescents," Pediatrics, Volume 126, Number 1, July 2010 p. 28-36.

Marquardt, E., Glenn, & Clark, K. "My daddy's name is donor." New York: Institute for American Values, p. 1-135.

Silverstein, L.B., & Auerbach, C. F. (1999). "Deconstructing the essential father," American Psychologist, 54, 6, p. 397-407.

Ban Bullfighting but Kill Babies?: Spain’s New Moral Values Criticized by Pro-Life Leader

By Hilary White

ROME, July 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As Spain’s newly liberalized abortion law comes into effect the Spanish regional government of Catalonia has banned the ancient blood sport of bullfighting, and the irony has not been lost on pro-life observers.

Catalonia's regional parliament voted Wednesday to ban bullfighting from January 1, 2012, making it the first region in mainland Spain to outlaw the centuries-old tradition, which has inspired artists from Goya to Picasso to Hemmingway. Bullfighting promoters have called the measure “outrageous” and have vowed to “launch a huge battle” in conjunction with the conservative opposition Popular Party (PP), which sees itself as the defender of Spanish cultural traditions.

Monsignore Ignacio Barreiro Carambula, the director of the Rome office of Human Life International and an Uruguayan of Spanish descent, said that the banning of bullfighting in Spain, like the banning of fox hunting in Britain, even as those governments promote abortion, represents a triumph of newly invented moral values based on arbitrary “progressive” whims and social fads.

He told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that the banning of bullfighting and the promotion of abortion is part of the same liberalizing social re-engineering project being undertaken by the far left in Spain.

Barreiro said that “a large percentage of the persons in favor of animal rights are not concerned at all about the rights of the unborn.” Those who voted for the bullfighting ban, he said, are on the progressive left, the same people who have pushed to expand abortion and homosexuality.

“This is based in a wrong ideology,” he said. “Animals should not be treated with cruelty, but animals do not have rights. Rights are inherent to the human person, so from the moment of conception, you have a human being who has rights. Animals need to be treated with respect, but is not a bearer of rights.”

“It’s an irony that these people are protecting non-existent rights and they conveniently forget about real rights of human beings. And they forget about the most basic of all rights, which is life,” Barreiro said.

Barreiro added that the efforts to ban longstanding cultural traditions like bullfighting and fox hunting is a favorite work of “progressive” liberals and socialists. “Bullfighting is part of Spanish tradition,” he said. “It’s a very ancient Spanish tradition that has to be respected. It’s a manly sport and obviously in manly sports you have risks.”

He compared it to the determination of the Tony Blair Labour party in Britain to ban fox hunting based on “animal rights,” while working to liberalize abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Barreiro put it down to the creation of “new moral values” that are based on arbitrary social fads instead of perennial philosophical norms.

“New moral values are coined that are not part of the Natural Law, and real values are destroyed or not recognized.”

“Socialists and liberals are bent on destroying the traditional customs and institutions of society.”

“The main issue,” he said, “is the protection of animals against the lack of protection of babies. But it must be mentioned, this conscious policy of different socialist and liberal governments to destroy legitimate cultural traditions of different nations. It’s a conscious decision.”

27 July 2010

Obama, the liar

26 July 2010

Atheism and satanic deception

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Gustave Doré's depiction of Satan from John Milton's Paradise Lost.

Creation Ministries International in their article on atheism declare concerning atheism and deception:

Another reason for rejecting God (choosing atheism), is a willing acceptance of satanic deception.

The angel Lucifer (“luminous one”) fell and became Satan (“adversary”) due to his desire to supplant God. This was Lucifer’s single-minded obsession.

He not only rejected God by attempting to supplant Him, but he urged humans to do likewise. Satan urged Eve to choose against God for her own self-fulfilment:

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3:1-5 ESV).

The tactic is clear: firstly, question God’s statements, then, contradict God’s statements and, finally, urge rebellion in seeking equality with God.

This manifests in atheists as

1. Questioning whether there is a God to make statements in the first place, so God did not say anything.

2. Contradicting the statements said to have been spoken by God.

3. Seeking equality with God by replacing God with the self.

This satanic deception appeals strongly to atheists as it bolsters two of their desired delusions: 1) absolute autonomy—being free to do as they please, and 2) the lack of ultimate accountability—there are no eternal consequences for doing as they please.[1]

In a 2008 interview, Dinesh D'Souza declared:

Look at Satan's reason for rebelling against God. It's not that he doesn't recognize that God is greater than he is. He does. It's just that he doesn't want to play by anybody else's rules. This idea that it is better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven is Satan's motto, and it turns out that this is also the motto of contemporary atheists such as Christopher Hitchens.[2]



Promulgation of Atheism and Some Historical Consequences of Atheism

See also: Atheism and morality

Stain glass depiction of the Apostle John

The Apostle John records Jesus making an allusion to the devil and declaring that he is a thief that comes to rob, kill, and destroy.[3] Jesus also declares the children of the devil want to carry out their father's wishes and that the devil was a liar and a murderer.[4] As far as the methods used to promulgate atheism, there is a history of using deception. In addition, atheistic communist countries have used violent means to suppress theism.

Concerning atheism and mass murder, Christian apologist Gregory Koukl wrote that "the assertion is that religion has caused most of the killing and bloodshed in the world. There are people who make accusations and assertions that are empirically false. This is one of them."[5] Koukl details the number of people killed in various events involving theism and compares them to the much higher tens of millions of people killed under communist atheistic regimes.[5] It has been estimated that in less than the past 100 years, governments under the banner of communism have caused the death of somewhere between 40,472,000 to 259,432,000 human lives.[6][7][8][9][10][11] Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term democide (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.[12]

Koukl summarized by stating:

It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it can produce it, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God.[5]

Charles Baudelaire - atheism and satanic deception

See also: Atheism Quotes

Charles Baudelaire expressed a common belief concerning atheism and satanic deception in his short story The Generous Gambler written in 1864:

He complained in no way of the evil reputation under which he lived, indeed, all over the world, and he assured me that he himself was of all living beings the most interested in the destruction of Superstition, and he avowed to me that he had been afraid, relatively as to his proper power, once only, and that was on the day when he had heard a preacher, more subtle than the rest of the human herd, cry in his pulpit: "My dear brethren, do not ever forget, when you hear the progress of lights praised, that the loveliest trick of the Devil is to persuade you that he does not exist!

See also

25 July 2010

Atheist With Doubts About Darwinism

24 July 2010

One in Seven Men in London “Gay Scene” Infected with HIV/AIDS

Sexual health campaigners” continue to push condom message while rates climb

By Hilary White

LONDON, July 22, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Rates of HIV infection and AIDS have risen dramatically in the last seven years among London’s homosexual men according to a homosexualist health group. The Terrence Higins Trust (THT) released figures yesterday showing that one in seven men in the London “gay scene” are infected with the HIV virus, compared to about one in 20 gay men nationally. The figure rose from 299 new cases in 2000 to 710 new cases in 2007.

According to the AIDS awareness agency AVERT, at the end of 2008 gay men were estimated to account for 38% of HIV cases in the UK, despite their making up only a tiny percentage of the overall population.

The University College London and the Health Protection Agency (HPA) conducted the Gay Men’s Sexual Health Survey in 2009 in 36 London venues such as bars, clubs and bathhouses. The survey found a 15.2 percent HIV prevalence in such venues between December 2008 and February 2009 among 1,251 men tested.

Alan Wardle, Head of Health Promotion at THT said that men in the “gay scene” are “genuinely shocked” by the figure. “Yet the reality is that, after Brighton, London has the highest HIV prevalence of any city in the UK.”

The HPA presented its findings at the International AIDS conference in Vienna today.

The agency said that it has also found that AIDS infection rates have jumped 60 percent among those over 50 between 2000 and 2007.

Ruth Smith, a senior HIV scientist at the HPA’s Centre for Infections said, “We estimate that nearly half of older adults diagnosed between 2000 and 2007 were infected at age 50 or over and this highlights the importance of HIV testing – whatever your age.”

The agency reported that in 2008 there were 7,382 new diagnoses of HIV in the UK, with an estimated 32 percent of adults over 15 years being diagnosed later in life.

Despite the evident failure of condom campaigns to curb HIV rates either in Britain or in the developing world, both the Terrence Higgins Trust and the Health Protection Agency concluded that “safe sex” was the only solution. Wardle said that the THT is launching the “One in Seven” campaign to “remind” men in the London gay scene to use condoms.

Ruth Smith said, “We must continually reinforce the safe sex message – using a condom with all new or casual partners is the surest way to ensure people do not become infected with a serious sexually transmitted infection such as HIV.”

21 July 2010

Prominent Black Activist Admits Branding Tea Party Racist Is Effective Tool For NAACP & Democrats

Prominent black activist Mary Frances Berry admitted today that accusing the tea party activists of being racists is an effective tool for the democrats and far left organizations.

Mary Frances Berry admitted this at the Politico:

Professor of American Social Thought and History, U. Penn. :

Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.

And, there you have it. Democrats are flinging the r-word as a political maneuver. We all knew it. Now they admit it.

17 July 2010

The Danger of the Ouija Board

Obama Bumper Sticker Removal Kit

Can I Live? - Nick Cannon

16 July 2010

Is God Good

14 July 2010

Obama’s NASA Muslim Strategy Echoes His Nutty Cairo Speech

Student of history, Barack Obama, spoke to the Muslim World in Cairo last year.
During his speech Obama congratulated the Muslim World for their many accomplishments.
Obama’s Cairo Speech – The Transcript:

As a student of history, I also know civilisation’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

Unfortunately, Dear Leader was once again repeating Far Left talking points and not facts.
Here is what he forgot to mention:

** The compass- The use of a magnetic compass as a direction finder occurred sometime before 1044, but incontestable evidence for the use of the compass as a navigational device did not appear until 1119 in China. The earliest reference to an iron fish-like compass in the Islamic world occurs in a Persian talebook from 1232- Wikipedia.

** The pen- Ancient Egyptians developed writing on papyrus scrolls when scribes used thin reed brushes or reed pens. The quill pen was used in Qumran, Judea to write some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and then introduced into Europe by around 700 AD before the founding of Islam. Ma’ād al-Mu’izz, the Fatimid Caliph of Egypt, was provided a fountain pen 250 years later- Wikipedia.

** Printing- Woodblock printing is a technique for printing text, images or patterns used widely throughout East Asia and originating in China in antiquity as a method of printing on textiles and later paper- Wikipedia.

** Spread of disease and how it is healed- It’s not clear how Islam contributed to the understanding of disease but today Muslim Sharia Councils in Nigeria and Pakistan have opposed vaccinations in their districts.

** Arches- Arches appeared as early as the 2nd millennium BC in Mesopotamian brick architecture, but their systematic use started with the Ancient Romans who were the first to apply the technique to a wide range of structures- Wikipedia.

** Religious Tolerance- No churches or synagogues have been destroyed in Saudi Arabia since it was established in 1932 —because none are allowed. There is no declared Muslim state, which offers full civil rights to members of other religions. – Front Page.

** Racial Equality- Muhammad and many of his companions bought, sold, freed, and captured slaves. At the end of the 19th century, a shift in Muslim thought and interpretation of the Qur’an occurred, and slavery became seen as opposed to Islamic principles of justice and equality. This interpretation has not been accepted by the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia. Slavery claiming the sanction of Islam is documented presently in the African republics of Chad, Mauritania, Niger, Mali and Sudan.- Wikipedia.

A year later after this speech in Cairo we find out Obama’s NASA starategy includes making Muslims feel good about their non-accomplishments and non-contributions to science. Except that now the Obama Administration claims that is not their strategy… Even though it’s been confirmed.

No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan


They may call it the "Land of the Pure," but Pakistan turns out to be anything but. The Muslim country, which has banned content on at least 17 websites to block offensive and blasphemous material, is the world's leader in online searches for pornographic material, FoxNews.com has learned.

They may call it the "Land of the Pure," but Pakistan turns out to be anything but.

The Muslim country, which has banned content on at least 17 websites to block offensive and blasphemous material, is the world's leader in online searches for pornographic material, FoxNews.com has learned.

“You won’t find strip clubs in Islamic countries. Most Islamic countries have certain dress codes,” said Gabriel Said Reynolds, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Notre Dame. “It would be an irony if they haven’t shown the same vigilance to pornography.”

So here's the irony: Google ranks Pakistan No. 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches per person for certain sex-related content.

Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for "horse sex" since 2004, "donkey sex" since 2007, "rape pictures" between 2004 and 2009, "rape sex" since 2004, "child sex" between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, "animal sex" since 2004 and "dog sex" since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.

The country also is tops -- or has been No. 1 -- in searches for "sex," "camel sex," "rape video," "child sex video" and some other searches that can't be printed here.

Google Trends generates data of popular search terms in geographic locations during specific time frames. Google Insights is a more advanced version that allows users to filter a search to geographic locations, time frames and the nature of a search, including web, images, products and news.

Pakistan ranked No. 1 in all the searches listed above on Google Trends, but on only some of them in Google Insights.

“We do our best to provide accurate data and to provide insights into broad search patterns, but the results for a given query may contain inaccuracies due to data sampling issues, approximations, or incomplete data for the terms entered,” Google said in a statement, when asked about the accuracy of its reports.

The Embassy of Islamic Republic of Pakistan did not reply to a request for an interview.

In addition to banning content on 17 websites, including islamexposed.blogspot.com, Pakistan is monitoring seven other sites -- Google, Yahoo, Bing, YouTube, Amazon, MSN and Hotmail -- for anti-Islamic content, the Associated Press reported in June.

But it’s not to censor the Pakistani people, Reynolds said. It’s to shut out the rest of the world.

“[It] could lead to conversion, which would undermine the very order of the state,” he said. “Part of protecting the society is making sure that there is no way it could be undermined in terms of foreign influences.”

Pakistan temporarily banned Facebook in May when Muslim groups protested the “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day” page, where users were encouraged to upload pictures of the Prophet Muhammad. The page remains on Facebook, but Pakistani users are unable to view it, said Andrew Noyes, manager of Facebook’s Public Policy Communication.

And while Pakistan is taking measures to prevent blasphemous material from being viewed by its citizens, pornographic material is “certainly” contradictory to Islam, too, Reynolds said.

The country’s punishment for those charged with blasphemy is execution, but the question remains what -- if anything -- can be done about people who search for porn on the Web.

“It’s a new phenomenon,” Reynolds said.

12 July 2010

"I am Israel"

11 July 2010

Europe Marches on to the Criminalization of Christianity

By Hilary White

ROME, June 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – When a European Christian pro-family group applied to join the Fundamental Rights Platform (FRP) of the EU’s Human Rights Agency, they did not expect to be denounced as promoters of “hate.”

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) objected to a statement by the Alliance of Romania’s Families (ARF) calling same-sex “marriage” an example of “human degeneration,” and denied their request for membership.

The ARF, a group lobbying to retain Romania’s traditional Christian social and legal underpinnings, had written on their website that, “So-called alternatives such as ‘families’ consisting of same-sex, are nothing but expressions of human degeneration.” The FRA responded, saying, “The qualification of other people’s sexual orientation as human degeneration is not an acceptable basis for creating a structured and fruitful dialogue.”

In a letter to the ARF’s president, Peter Costea, the agency called this “a fundamental rights perception that is incompatible with the participation in the FRP.” The agency also explained that their position was based upon the belief that ARF's views amount to "hate speech."

Costea responded to the FRA, saying that the rejection was “ideological and political.” He defended his organization, saying that members “believe in human rights and dignity for all, in diversity and mutual respect.”

“We believe in civilized dialogue and robust debate on issues of wide social impact and importance. Nevertheless, we need to point out, respectfully yet unambiguously, our view that your decision to deny ARF membership … is discriminatory and improper.”

“To us it evinces an attempt to weed out organisations that express, based on their freedom of expression and religion, views that are different from those officially espoused by the Agency.”

In 2009 the Fundamental Rights Agency invited all “stakeholding” nongovernmental organizations from EU countries to submit applications for membership in the Platform. The purpose of the platform, the agency says, is to engage in a “structured dialogue with civil society,” to ensure that the EU and national governments respect the fundamental rights of all persons.

While turning down the ARF, the Fundamental Rights Agency accepted the application of the British Humanist Association (BHA), one of Britain's most outspokenly anti-Christian lobby groups that works for the removal of all signs of Christianity from public life in Britain.

The BHA features a who’s who list of Britain’s most hostile anti-Christians, including atheist Richard Dawkins and its current president, radical feminist journalist Polly Toynbee. The group is best known recently for its “atheist bus” campaigns and its political work to disestablish the Church of England, to abolish daily worship in schools and to “reform” religious education to exclude religious belief.

10 July 2010

Anglican Conservatives Foil Attempt to Appoint Gay Bishop in England

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

BRITAIN, July 9, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An attempt to name an openly homosexual priest as Anglican Bishop of Southwark in England has been foiled by conservatives following the premature revelation of his candidacy, according to reports in the British media.

Dr. Jeffrey John, who lives in a civil union with a man, while claiming to live a chaste life, was rejected after a leak to the media that he was under consideration, provoking a strongly negative response from more conservative Anglicans. It is the second time his candidacy has been rejected. The first rejection, in 2003, happened under similar circumstances.

Dr. Rowan Williams, the Anglican Communion's leading bishop, was reportedly infuriated by the leak and has launched an investigation to determine who was responsible for it.

The conflict over the abortive appointment of John comes as the Anglican leadership prepares to meet Saturday in a General Synod to discuss another issue of contention in the Anglican Communion: the appointment of female bishops. Female priests are already a cause of bitter division among Anglicans, and for many, female bishops are sufficient reason to terminate their relationship with the Communion.

Anglican conservatives in Britain, the United States, and other countries have broken communion with their local bishops in recent years over such issues, and in some cases have initiated the process to enter into communion with the Catholic Church.

An openly homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson, was appointed as bishop of New Hampshire in 2003, and only two months ago an open lesbian, Mary Glasspool, was named suffragan bishop in the diocese of Los Angeles. Both live with their gay lovers. Their appointments have accelerated the process of disintegration in the Anglican Communion.

Homosexual Priest Stole $1.3 Million for Male Escorts, Etc.

By Patrick B. Craine

WATERBURY, Connecticut, July 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A homosexual Connecticut Roman Catholic priest allegedly stole over a million dollars from his parish to pay for various extravagances and illicit activities, including male escorts, report the Waterbury police.

Fr. Kevin Gray, 64, former pastor of Sacred Heart parish in Waterbury, has been charged with first-degree larceny after taking $1.3 million out of parish funds to pay for escorts, hotels, meals out, and clothes.

He carried credit cards for two men on his account – one whom he met at a strip club, the other from an escort service. He paid tuition to Harvard for another man that he met in Central Park.

"Up until this investigation he had an excellent reputation," police Captain Christopher Corbett told Fox News. "The life he was leading in New York City was much different than the life he was leading in Waterbury as a priest. He's certainly an example of someone who was leading a double life."

The priest began taking money when he was transferred to Sacred Heart in 2003. He told police that he “had grown to hate being a priest” and “he felt the church owed it to him.”

The financial discrepancies were reported by the archdiocese on May 27 after Fr. Gray took a medical leave in April and disappeared. He turned himself in to police Tuesday, and was arraigned with bail set at $750,000.

The police affidavit says Fr. Gray told police he is homosexual and that he objects to the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.

In a 2005 instruction, the Vatican prohibited admitting homosexuals into seminaries, and warned that "one must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.”
The directive has gone unheeded in many dioceses, and has even been directly opposed by some bishops and religious orders. Some commentators have suggested that the instruction was not meant to bar men with homosexual tendencies, but merely those with an immature sexuality.

But Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone reaffirmed the teaching in 2008, in a letter to the world’s bishops, insisting that the ban on admitting men with homosexual tendencies to seminaries applies universally.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Homosexuals Not Permitted in Any Seminaries, Reaffirms Vatican

Vatican Officially Releases Document on Homosexuality and the Priesthood

Extracts From Official Release of Vatican Document on Homosexuality and the Priesthood

Women 'Must Be Prepared to Kill' Unborn Children to Protect Autonomy: Times Writer

LONDON, U.K., July 6, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - After contemplating the immense mysteries of human life and sacrificial love in comparison to a woman's "right to fertility control," a writer for the Times of London concludes that attempts by pro-aborts to dismiss the life of an unborn child are a "convenient lie" hiding the fact that, "Yes, abortion is killing.

“But,” she concludes, “it's the lesser evil."

Columnist Antonia Senior in a June 30 column (available by subscription only) says that, despite the fact that the abortion debate hinges upon whether the unborn child is a unique life or not, women who wish to assert the cause of their freedom from male domination "must be prepared to kill for it."

Senior begins by linking the cause of abortion to that of religious martyrs.

“Cradle Tower at the Tower of London is an interactive display that asks visitors to vote on whether they would die for a cause,” she says. "Standing where religious martyrs were held and tortured in Britain’s turbulent reformation, I could think of one cause I would stake my life on: a woman’s right to be educated, to have a life beyond the home and to be allowed by law and custom to order her own life as she chooses."

"And that includes complete control over her own fertility."

However, she admits that her "absolutist position” has been “under siege" since she gave birth to her own child.

She notes how "having a baby paints the world an entirely different hue" by revealing the underlying selfishness in what at first appears to be courageous self-affirmation.

Senior gives the example of Leo Tolstoy’s adulterous heroine Anna Karenina in the book by the same title, writing: “If you read the book as a teenager, you back her choices with all the passion of youth. Love over convention, go Anna! Then you have children and realise that Anna abandons her son to shack up with a pretty soldier, and then her daughter when she jumps under a train. She becomes a selfish witch.”

Senior then launches into discussing abortion, which she says "hinges on the notion of life," no matter what other arguments or tactics are employed. "Either a foetus is a life from conception, or it is not,” she notes.

Senior then admits that: "What seems increasingly clear to me is that, in the absence of an objective definition, a foetus is a life by any subjective measure. My daughter was formed at conception, and all the barely understood alchemy that turned the happy accident of that particular sperm meeting that particular egg into my darling, personality-packed toddler took place at that moment. She is so unmistakably herself, her own person — forged in my womb, not by my mothering."

"Any other conclusion is a convenient lie that we on the pro-choice side of the debate tell ourselves to make us feel better about the action of taking a life."

"That little seahorse shape floating in a willing womb is a growing miracle of life. In a resentful womb it is not a life, but a foetus — and thus killable."

This fact, she says, leaves feminism with a "problem," to which she attributes the "groundswell" of young pro-life feminists.

But, she insists, "you cannot separate women’s rights from their right to fertility control."

"The single biggest factor in women’s liberation was our newly found ability to impose our will on our biology."

She concludes therefore that, "As ever, when an issue we thought was black and white becomes more nuanced, the answer lies in choosing the lesser evil” – in this case choosing "the expectation of a life unburdened by misogyny," which she suggests can only be achieved through abortion.

Hence, she says, "The nearly 200,000 aborted babies in the UK each year are the lesser evil, no matter how you define life, or death, for that matter. If you are willing to die for a cause, you must be prepared to kill for it, too."

Desperate Teenager Doesn't Want to Be Gay

Author / Contributor :: Neil from Florida -

By: Neil
(Posted June 2010)

Now that I have completed my counseling program with a JONAH endorsed therapist, I wanted to thank Arthur Goldberg and JONAH for changing my life in a most positive direction. You may remember that I initially contacted you in September, 2009 as a 19 year old Jewish college student who only had the faintest of hope that I could eventually seek to have a beautiful loving wife and children and a normal family environment. I was afraid "I will be disowned by my parents and lose all my friends" if I gave into today's cultural encouragement to identify myself as "gay." The gay activist lobby seized upon my admissions that I was more powerfully sexually attracted to men than to women, and told me that the only way to feel "free" was to identify as gay.

I wrote you then that "I don't really feel comfortable around strong men. I feel inadequate." I also informed you that my earlier (more youthful) attractions to women were "dying out" and that I had tremendous performance anxiety with my present girlfriend. Because I wanted to commit suicide, I told you I was writing you as "a last resort attempt" and hoped you could somehow assist me in following my heterosexual dream of normality. I informed you that I wrote because "I have no one else to go to" and concluded by begging you to respond. I ended by writing, "I need help, I want help, and I need to become myself again. I miss my old self. I was so awesome."

You responded immediately. You gave me hope. You provided me with reading material and suggested a counselor with whom I could work. Without your help and encouragement, I would never have achieved the strong insights and incredible perspectives I gained on life-issues that previously disturbed me nor would I now be moving forward with both strength and direction in my life. From the bottom of my heart, I wish to thank you for the myriad number of services you created and from which I have greatly benefited. I no longer even think of taking my own life or slicing open my veins. The gender affirming processes you provided make me feel good about myself and in less than a year of counseling, I found myself able to really move forward in my life. My greatest hope is that JONAH continues to help others and is able to give them the hope and type of information to succeed that I received.

I particularly appreciate the fact that you encouraged me to speak to my family and to bring them into my process of healing. I never realized how supportive my family could be in my healing journey. Thank you.

JONAH provides invaluable information to those of us who seek "change." You do so on a topic that is neither spoken about nor considered common knowledge (at least among my generation), that is, the ability to grow out of unwanted same-sex attractions (SSA) and to understand that no one is born gay or lesbian.

As a young person growing into maturity, I can unequivocally report that the youth of today face an especially hard task. The gay agenda is very strong in the USA, and through the stories and images to which we are exposed on TV & media as well as in school, a gay identity is made to seem normal and even appealing. Many teenagers at some level go through sexual identity questions but most are unaware that resources are out there that can help us not accept such an identity. Taking on such an identity simply didn't feel right to me. And, I'm believe I am the lucky one ... because I somehow heard about JONAH. As you can see from my summary of my initial

E-mail above, I took the initiative to both write into the info@jonahweb.org to ask for help, and after receiving an immediate response, called Arthur to find out about the many resources available.

Arthur and JONAH really helped me by providing alternative data that provided a balance to the distorted information out there, information that is pretty ridiculous. They say "you can't change SSA," and "do what feels good and don't worry if some do not consider it normal." In dealing with my sexuality, I was being fed information in school and by the media that we have the absolute right to decide when and where to have sex and who to have it with. If I disagreed with this belief in sexual freedom, then I wasn't normal. This philosophy is what gives the gay agenda its power; it preys upon the doubts of adolescents, the "what if's" of kids, and makes us feel powerful and important. It is the lure of a cause that can give older teenagers a feeling of belonging and an identity that they may otherwise feel is missing. It particularly appeals to those who are lonely or who don't seem to fit into the "regular crowd." Rather than help us transform, mature, and grow up in healthy ways, the sexual liberationists actually set us adrift in a sea of confusion and led us into unhealthy sexual practices. This disgusts me greatly; and, it has probably led more kids astray than I care to imagine.

I have grown light years from the first E-mail I sent asking for help. My counselor not only worked with me on a weekly basis but he also gave me regular homework to complete between our sessions. I have learned the lessons he so diligently provided and I applied the concepts I learned into everyday living. I have conquered social fears that I had; I have challenged irrational thoughts which for a time (too long) stood unchallenged; I have regained my manhood which feels just great. Now I can see myself marrying, having kids and being able to educate and teach them all the life lessons they will need with the help of my future wife. The work I have done with JONAH and its counselors have provided me with the tools I needed not only to live my life but more importantly to enter into a marriage and to help my future kids.

In closing, I give my blessings to JONAH and I thank you, Mr. Goldberg, for the help I've received. I know JONAH will continue to save lives and nurture men and women back to health.

Former Lesbian: I Craved Emotional Balance of Hetero Relationship


By Kathleen Gilbert

UNITED KINGDOM, July 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - British comedienne and former lesbian Jackie Clune has published an account of how, exhausted by the emotional dysfunction of her lesbian relationships, she discovered in her subsequent relationship with her husband a freedom to "[walk] alongside each other rather than spending life locked in face-to-face intimacy or combat."

"Looking at my four children racing around the garden with their father, it seems almost impossible to believe that only a few years ago I never imagined having a family," writes Clune in a column published in the UK's Daily Mail June 26.

Clune, who is also known as a cabaret performer, actress, and broadcaster, says she was raised in a "very traditional Irish Catholic" home and and fell in love with a man at 17. It was in college that she stumbled upon a pamphlet claiming that heterosexuality is a mere construct to be altered at will, which prompted her to break up with her boyfriend and live the typical lesbian lifestyle for the next 12 years, until she was 34 years old.

"I was excited by the close bond a relationship with another female could bring," she writes.

But the experience was not as she at first envisioned it to be. In an interview with the Times' Penny Wark in October 2005, Clune called lesbian culture "dictatorial and intimidating" and "the opposite of the sapphic fluffy nirvana I expected."

Despite the closeness of her relationships, Clune admits that the hyper-emotional world of a female-to-female sexual bond was "exhausting." "The women I went out with were by and large more inclined to be insecure and to need reassurance and I found myself in the male role of endlessly reassuring my girlfriends," she writes. "The subtle mood changes of everyday life would be picked over inexhaustibly."

Clune describes how one lover was so jealous and insecure that "every single time we enjoyed a night out ... we would have a row and have to leave." "Back home, we would then spend the next four hours arguing about our relationship and my feelings of loyalty, fidelity and so on," she writes. "It was never-ending."

"Can you imagine waking up beside a woman when you've both got raging PMT (premenstrual tension)?" she adds.

Ultimately, she says, the emotional rollercoaster forced her to reconsider her lesbian plunge - something she clearly says she "chose," and was not born into. "Unlike most men, women, of course, offer each other endless support and there's hardly ever any lack of communication," writes Clune. "But - bizarre as it may seem - I found myself longing for exactly the opposite."

Following "a calculated decision to try men again," Clune says that she found in her future husband Richard a "quiet kindness" and "lack of neediness" that appealed to her. "I felt we were walking alongside each other rather than spending life locked in face-to-face intimacy or combat," she writes. "It felt natural and not at all scary. He was sanguine about my past and never suffered the insecurities I had come to expect."

"It was a breath of fresh air. I've always been fiercely independent and felt I could be myself with him."

Although harboring no hard feelings toward her former companions and way of life, Clune concludes that she had "outgrown lesbianism." "When we're young, we all need to belong to a tribe and to have a banner to march under," she says, adding that "calling myself a lesbian was almost like calling myself a punk or a goth."

She says her return to heterosexuality continues to draw vitriol from the lesbian community: one major lesbian publication voted her "Most Disappointing Lesbian Of The Year," and a now-defunct Facebook group was erected entitled, "People Like Jackie Clune Should Be Taken Outside And Shot." "Although the criticism is hurtful, I understand where it's coming from - I've confused everybody," she says.

Arthur Goldberg, a board certified counselor and expert on assisting individuals with unwanted same-sex attraction, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that Clune's story is "not atypical" of the lesbian lifestyle. Goldberg, who is co-founder of Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH), argued that if proponents of the homosexual agenda "admitted what the true aspects of many [homosexual] relationships are," the notion that they are simply equivalent to heterosexual relationships wouldn't hold water.

"One of the key criteria of lesbianism is emotional dependency," said Goldberg. "In male gay relationships, it's much more about sex. More typically [with] lesbian women ... it's much more serial monogamy.

"Your relationship lasts 2-3 years [in which] you can't live without the other person, your whole world is this person, which is why there's so much jealousy in the lesbian world, and why there's so much violence in the lesbian world."

Goldberg said it was also not uncommon for women, often more "sexually fluid" than men, to choose to enter the lesbian lifestyle after some experience of disillusionment with men, before returning to heterosexuality.

07 July 2010

Socialist Hillary Clinton Wants the US to Spread the Wealth Around More

Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, July 6, 2010, 2:54 PM

Hillary Clinton spoke at the Kyiv Polytechnic Institute in Kyiv, Ukraine on July 2, 2010.
Via FOX Nation:

It’s important, too, that we look at how to promote broadly-based prosperity. One of the problems in societies around the world today is that too much of the productivity of the economies are going to too few. Too few people, the political and economic elite, are realizing the vast majority of benefits from economic activity. It’s true in my own country where, unfortunately, economic inequality is increasing. And it’s true in Ukraine. It’s true in Europe and Asia and Africa and South America. So part of the challenge of economic growth and prosperity is to make sure it gets down and equally spread among people.

The Right Scoop has the video.

04 July 2010

Unprecedented: Egyptian Government Suppresses Christian Doctrine

Print Send RSS

Translations of this item:

It is not enough that the Egyptian government facilitates persecution of the Copts, Egypt's indigenous Christian minority. Now the government is interfering directly with the church's autonomy concerning doctrine. According to the Assyrian International News Agency:

The head of the Coptic Church in Egypt has rejected a court ruling that orders the church to allow divorced Copts to remarry in the church. In a press conference held on Tuesday June 8, Pope Shenouda [III], reading from the statement issued by the Holy Synod's 91 Bishops, including himself, said: "The Coptic Church respects the law, but does not accept rulings which are against the Bible and against its religious freedom which is guaranteed by the Constitution." He went on to say "the recent ruling is not acceptable to our conscience, and we cannot implement it." He also said that marriage is a holy sacrament of a purely religious nature and not merely an "administrative act."

Though little reported in the West, this issue is rapidly boiling over. There is even talk that, if he does not submit to the court's ruling, the pope will (once again) be imprisoned. What is behind such unprecedented governmental interference with the Coptic Church's autonomy?

Reading Egypt's national newspaper, Al Ahram, one gets the impression that, by trying to make divorce and remarriage easier for Copts, the Egyptian government is attempting to "liberalize" Coptic society—only to be challenged by an antiquated pope not open to "reform." It quotes one Copt saying that the "Pope's limiting divorce and remarriage to cases of adultery is unfair. It is against human nature." Even the manager of the Centre for Egyptian Women's Legal Assistance claims that his position "exposes Pope Shenouda's desire to impose his will over the Christian community" (a curious statement, considering that some 10,000 Copts recently demonstrated in support of the pope, and that the Catholic and Orthodox churches—which guide some 1.5 billion Christians—hold similar views on divorce and remarriage).

At any rate, lest the reader truly think that the Egyptian government is becoming more "liberal," there are a few important facts to remember:

First, according to the Second Article of the Egyptian Constitution, Sharia law—one of, if not the most draconian law codes to survive the Medieval period—is "the principal source of legislation." This means that any number of measures contrary to basic human rights are either explicitly or implicitly supported by the Egyptian government, including polygamy, the obstruction of churches, and institutionalized discrimination against non-Muslims and females in general. Put differently, Sharia law can be liberal—but only to male Muslims, who (speaking of marriage and divorce) can have up to four wives, and divorce them by simply uttering "I divorce you" thrice (even via "text messaging").

Moreover, the Egyptian government—again, in accordance to Sharia law—prevents Muslims from converting to Christianity. Mohammad Hegazy, for instance, tried formally to change his religion from Muslim to Christian on his I.D. card—yes, in Egypt, people are Gestapo-like categorized by their religion—only to be denied by the Egyptian court. (Many other such anecdotes abound). In other words, while the Egyptian government portrays itself as "modernizing" the church's "archaic" position on divorce and remarriage, it—the government, not Al Azhar, nor some radical sheikhs, nor yet the Muslim mob—prevents (including by imprisonment and torture) Muslims from converting to Christianity.

As for those who accuse Pope Shenouda of behaving no better than "closed-minded" radicals, consider: he is not forcing a law on individual Copts; he is simply saying that, in accordance to the Bible (e.g., Matt 5:32), and except in certain justifiable circumstances (e.g., adultery) Copts cannot remarry in the church: "Let whoever wants to remarry to do it away from us. There are many ways and churches to marry in. Whoever wants to remain within the church has to abide by its laws."

If this still sounds a tad "non-pluralistic," know that at least Copts have a way out: quit the church. No such way out for Muslims: Sharia law—Egypt's "primal source of legislation"—mandates death for Muslims who wish to quit Islam.

Nor has the inherent hypocrisy of the government's position been missed by Egyptians: "The Pope evaded answering a question presented by a reporter in the press conference on whether the court would dare order Al Azhar [Egypt's highest Islamic authority] to agree to a Muslim marrying a fifth wife and not only four, comparing it to the interference of the Court in the Bible teachings through its recent ruling." A good question, indeed.

Finally, the grandest oddity of this situation is the fact that, for all its inhumane practices, Sharia law does, in fact, permit dhimmis to govern their communities according to their own creeds, a fact not missed by the pope himself, who "pointed to Islamic Law, which allows religious minorities to follow their own rules and customs."

In short, the Egyptian government is behaving even more intolerantly than its medieval Muslim predecessors who, while openly oppressive of Christians, at least allowed the latter to govern their own, personal affairs according to Christian doctrine. As Pope Shenouda declared at the emergency Holy Synod, "the ruling must be reconsidered, otherwise this will mean that the Copts are suffering and that they are religiously oppressed."

Indeed, when Copts are violently persecuted by Muslims, the government claims that it cannot control the actions of a minority of "extremists." However, now that the Egyptian government is personally tampering with the church's ability to live according to Christian doctrine, what more proof is needed that it seeks to subvert Coptic society and is therefore an enabler of Coptic persecution?


Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More