Here you will find the archive of all the email newsletters and other items SoL has displayed in the Center Column of the website over the years.
Bye-Bye Boy Scouts?
The Boy Scouts of America. A treasured institution all about aiding boys in developing proper masculinity and responsible manhood, helping boys become morally straight godly citizens, giving boys opportunities to interact in healthy ways with other boys and men. We wish. Even after two years of research and a supposedly final decision to ban open homosexuals, the fact that the BSA is again rethinking its core values regardless of the danger to boys, shows that one of the last hold-outs against the normalization and embrace of gayness is going the way of the wicked world. You might say the BSA has more chicken in it than Chick-Fil-A. Although the BSA has postponed its new final decision until May, we believe it will likely end up encouraging the very opposite of its stated purposes. Here are some realities to think about:
Gay activist organizations target kids through every established organization that has kids in it. GLAAD, HRC, GLSEN, and every other gay affirming group, along with Planned Parenthood and others, all have "outreach" programs aimed specifically to indoctrinate youth to experiment with all manner of sex and sexuality. Tammy Bruce (who laments that she herself is a lesbian) in her 2003 book, The Death of Right and Wrong, wrote, "I believe this grab for children by the sexually confused adults of the Gay Elite represents the most serious problem facing our culture today." In their grab for the rising generation gay activists have not only come up with new institutions created in their image too many to name here, but attacked societal norms. They have cleverly infiltrated every type of traditional-values institution, including marriage, family, churches, schools, media, businesses, and of course the Girl and Boy Scouts. These institutions have been patiently and unceasingly singled out, pressured, and taken over to some degree by gay activists.
If this whole thing is just about adult issues such as love and rights and equality, why are the minds and bodies of children and youth so important to militant gays? No, it's not to teach kids to be kind to everybody. It's to reorder society. The whole innate and immutable gay identity thing is a hoax. Honest gays admit it. In their own words, they must, "recruit, recruit, recruit," in order to accomplish the godless gay agenda. The easiest demographic to influence is the young, whether they are indoctrinated into homosexuality themselves or into the wholesale celebration of it in others. Children are the best way to get at parents, and the more people gays can win over, the more justified they become in their arrogance, bad ideas, and bad behaviors, and the more power they accrue. But here, you can hear it in their own words.
(Warning: the following excerpt, though read into the U. S. Congressional Record, contains disturbing material. It is from a 1987 article.) Activist Michael Swift wrote, "We shall sodomize your sons . . . We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us . . . The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated . . . Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable . . . All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men . . . All churches that condemn us will be closed . . . Those who oppose us will be exiled . . . There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race . . . Tremble hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks."
Sound scary? How about Satanic? Well, it's totally happening, in the above ways and also in new highly sophisticated and effective ways that did not exist in the 1980s. A friend asked the other day how gays could really be so bad when the ones she knows are so "nice." Think about it. Just because people are nice and do amazing and good things in public does not mean they can't be quite nasty in other ways you don't know about. Most all of our sins are private. In fact, many clever sociopaths wear the masks referred to above and are adept at hiding their Mr. Hydes from the whole gullible world. (Check out the movie "Bernie" for a good example of this and the short article following this one.) Descartes (1596-1650) put it this way: "The greatest souls are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the greatest virtues."
The truth is, homosexuality is by nature unnatural, perverse, and physically harmful. As such, those who proudly claim the gay identity have become past feeling, their consciences seared, when it comes to sexual morality, health, and decency. People preoccupied with out-of-bounds sexual "identities" possess decreased sexual limits and weakened self-control. For most proud gays, promiscuous male-on-male sex is an impulsive, casual, no-strings-attached activity. Anonymous partners are found in seconds over the internet.. All of this and more accounts for the inordinately high spread of sexually-transmitted disease and other maladies among gays. In addition, homosexuality is often predatory. Grown men seek to initiate younger men and boys. And boys in turn introduce homosexuality among their peers. And this is the thing the Boy Scouts of America can't make up its mind about!
FACT: Homosexuals sexually abuse children at a rate 36 times higher than heterosexual perverts. See the CDC website for details.
It is a travesty that our godless mainstream culture today refuses to make this connection. When a man is caught sexually abusing boys he is reported as a pedophile, not as a homosexual, same-sex sexually attracted pedophile. An example is the recent horrendous case of Jerry Sandusky, the assistant football coach at Penn State and founder of The Second Mile, an organization for underprivileged youth. As far as we know the news never mentioned Sandusky being homosexual even though he sodomized only boys. (We are not saying that heterosexual perverts are less bad than homosexual perverts, or that every homosexual abuses children. We are saying that homosexuality is always a vice that inordinately breeds more evil.)
Again, the societal embrace of the gay identity as an immutable trait is a well-planned and executed hoax. Intimidation, fear, and misinformation have deceived many, causing individuals, families, and institutions of all kinds to step in line. Money is also a highly effective tool. We bet you don't know that while the Boy Scout staff members actually implementing the local scout programs are all volunteers, the regional executives and the 10 or so national BSA executive officers receive outrageously large salaries, ranging from $250,000 to almost a million dollars a year each. It appears that Robert J. Mazzuca, Chief Scout Executive, received $980,755 total compensation for the year 2011, not counting paid expenses. It's no wonder all those scout supplies cost so much and that we are relentlessly approached to donate! And as the Gay Elite is known to carry out significant financial punishment on those who oppose them, it's no wonder these executives are leaning toward removing their gay ban. It's about money. News reports have substantiated this fact. Of course execuatives' salaries comprise only a small portion of the BSA's total budget, but it is obvious the monetary value of the BSA matters to them also. It is excruciatingly sad to consider that the head leaders of the BSA (or any other traditional-values-based institution) would care more about things like salaries, societal approval, and financial standing than the safety and proper rearing of youth.
Many parents have been wary of scouting for many years as is. Reports of homosexual sexual molestation are all too common in boy scout settings. Some fathers we know get involved in the scouting program and attend their sons' activities and camp outs just to keep their sons safe. Any institution's concession to include publicly self-determined gays-those who are openly proud of their preoccupation with same-sex sexuality, which is the bottom line definition of gayness-as members and leaders will only embolden such people and make things unimaginably worse, silence any opposition, and further weaken a formerly strong and purposeful organization.
Read this and weep, all who have enjoyed or now enjoy the scout program, all eagle scouts, all veteran scout leaders, all cubmasters, all den mothers, and all parents who were counting on scouting for their sons. If the BSA ends up embracing homosexuality, whether officially or by finding a way to pretend to sidestep the issue (which amounts to quiet assent), the least decent people can do is contact the BSA at 972-580-2000 and/or withhold their annual donations. We've heard of thousands who are doing so. It also appears that many families are seriously considering discontinuing their participation in the scouting program altogether.
As Lincoln knew, "not to call evil evil is to call it good." So long, BSA.
Gay Rights Icon Arrested for Child Porn
If anyone asks you the loaded question, "So you think all gays are pedophiles?" the correct answer is, "An inordinately high percentage are. It's a huge problem." (Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council was asked this very question on CNN a few days ago.) For most gays, the supposed harmless gay identity they adopt is a total ruse. It's all about sex, and very bad sexual manners indeed. In many cases, criminal.
This appears to be true in the case of Larry Brinkin, founding member of the highest funded gay activist organization, the Human Rights Campaign, and former San Francisco Human Rights Commission staffer. This is a very big wig, a man who had a whole week dedicated to him in San Francisco following his retirement.
The 66-year-old Brinkin was recently arrested for sending emails containing child pornography of the most egregious kind. Along with the most incredibly vile language, the pornography showed men engaged in sex acts with toddlers as young as 1-3. Apparently this has not been widely reported. We only heard of it online. If you have the stomach to know more, read this Bay Area Reporter article.
We suppose we shouldn't be surprised that Larry's fellow gay rights activists/followers are making excuses for him and praising his great accomplishments.
Too Many Are Silent
Book Review by Standard of Liberty's Janice Graham
of Stand for the Family by Sharon Slater, President of Family Watch International.
We have become a civilization-international, national, state, and local-that now persists on valuing what is most worthless and harmful in place of what is most essential and healthy. Sharon Slater outlines this fatal trajectory to a "t" in Stand for the Family. Shocking and riveting, this book has the potential to pry open the eyes of a comfortable and complacent people and motivate them to thought and action. We are given a wide picture, from the author's stunning personal witness of the "broad assault on the family" at the radical and powerful United Nations to shocking information exposing the stealthy sexual rights agenda as it worms its way into our homes, schools, churches, and communities.
Employing cold hard facts on every such travesty, from the demeaning of motherhood, to the lies involved in the evil of convenience abortion, to the sexualization of school children, to the societal embrace of pornography, to the whitewashing of homosexuality and every other perversion, Slater shows that "every aspect of the assault on the family comes down to one underlying movement, the movement to destroy all societal restraints on sexual behavior."
Not many pages are turned before the reader must confess: It is beyond doubt that in our modern world the selfish sexuality-related demands of a few are well on the way to topping every other concern: the value of human posterity, public health and safety, support for the conjugal family, parental rights, decency and modesty, religious freedom, bona fide education, the innocence of children, even people's rights to the kind of psychological care they wish to receive.
Undoubtedly, the most graphic example of modern sexuality-related irresponsibility and selfishness is popular abortion and the harmful lies promoting it. Of all the evils our society now winks at, this has to be the worst. Forewarning the faint of heart, Slater describes five abortion procedures, none of which are humane. It turns out there is no clean, painless, or harmless way of getting rid of a pregnancy at any stage, whether for the baby or the mother. During any abortion a human body is delivered, albeit dead or left to die, that is, in bloody pieces, burned, shriveled, suffocating, or punctured with a collapsed, sucked-out skull. And mothers who choose to abort their babies are at inordinately high risk of multiple negative complications and consequences (including death and suicide).
Slater is also greatly exercised, as we all should be, with the harm being done to America's posterity that has been most recently allowed to be born. She writes, "I am concerned about laws, policies and school programs that promote homosexuality as these can affect the well-being of children and youth . . . Socially liberal teachers are carefully shaping the minds and hearts of the rising generation . . . When homosexuality is promoted, children can more easily be persuaded to adopt a homosexual lifestyle and thus experience many of the well-documented negative outcomes associated with this lifestyle."
A distinction is made between those homosexuals who keep to themselves and those homosexuals and their supporters who are actively working to push the homosexual agenda (and we add, in whatever degree or aspect). Slater warns that the latter are dangerous and destructive on a societal scale. It is well documented that activists have long planned and plotted to draw public attention away from what homosexuality is really about: perverse, impulsive, self-indulgent sex and sexuality. Just one of many examples is how the "media rarely portrays the sexual abuse of boys by men as a homosexual issue." And Slater adds, "Please understand that the drive for 'sexual rights' is not limited to homosexuality."
In an attempt to understand why anti-family forces are so determined to break boundaries and redefine marriage and family, Slater points out that many individuals have been harmed, disappointed, and become embittered, and as a result wish to throw the baby out with the bath water. To these sad souls, the very idea of "traditional family" has become inflammatory. "Dysfunctional, abusive families are a breeding ground for anti-family activists. As more families disintegrate, the ranks of the anti-family forces will grow, and the attacks against the traditional family will increase."
What can be done? The author says the problem is simple. "Even though we are in the majority, too many people are remaining silent." Throughout her book the indefatigable Sharon Slater offers suggestions on how to get involved in the fight and includes "Ten Ways to Immunize Your Family Against the Assaults."
While the author insists, "this book is not a religious book" (emphasis hers), presenting her case entirely on the facts at hand, I suspect she knows exactly what she is up to. Everything moral, right, and good comes from God. The obligation to battle against the devil is certainly nothing new. Thus, a book about fighting evil and standing for good cannot be anything but religious at its heart whether anyone recognizes that or not.
The world has turned its back on its Creator. Only a return to God-"a moral and spiritual regeneration" to quote the late Robert Bork-can save it.
A Politically Incorrect Guide to 'Sexual Orientation'
December 29, 2012. Matt Barber is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law.
He serves as vice president of Liberty Counsel Action. Click here to read this article online at WND.
Matt Barber explains latest alphabet designations for behavioral deviants
“Once we determine, as a matter of law, that people are entitled to special privilege because they subjectively define their identity based upon deviant sexual proclivities and behaviors, moral, legal and cultural anarchy are inevitable.”
It’s a mixed up muddled up shook up world … ~ The Kinks
Through the secular-”progressive” looking-glass, the term “sexual orientation” has, in a few short years, evolved to accommodate an ever-expanding fruit basket of carnal appetites.
First it was “LGB” – liberal shorthand for “lesbian, gay and bisexual.” Then they added a “T” for “transgender.” That’s cross-dressing. You know, fellas like 45-year-old Clay Francis (aka, “Colleen”).
Mr. Francis enjoys macramé, long walks on the beach, wearing lady’s knickers and showering fully nude with 6-year-old girls [ed. See article below].
Because it’s illegal to “discriminate based on the basis of gender identity,” and since it’s the only “tolerant” thing to do, this brave bellwether of the persecuted LGBT victim-class has secured the “civil right” for him and other men to fully expose themselves to your daughter in the locker room at Olympia, Washington’s Evergreen State College.
But slow down, Dad. According to the law, if you have a problem with Mr. Francis baring all to your baby girl, then you’re the problem. You’re a “transphobe” (“homophobia’s” evil twin sister, er, brother … whatever). Deck this sicko for terrifying your first-grader and you’re off to jail while “Colleen” is off to the “Human Rights Campaign” for a commendation as the latest victim of an “anti-LGBT hate crime.”
Rosa Parks in drag, I guess.
But to make sure they didn’t miss anyone, pooh-bahs over at Child Corruption Central added a “Q” to the “sexual orientation” mix. In case some fifth-grader in Ms. Adamsapple’s health class gets the urge to “taste the rainbow” (and I don’t mean Skittles), the catch-all term “questioning” was tacked on.
Gotta meet those recruiting quotas.
According to the “gay” activist group GLSEN, sexuality is “fluid” and “may change over time.” Unless, of course, you’re already “gay,” and then change is impossible, fixed and immutable. Like that hotel in California, “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”
Nobody said it’s supposed to make sense.
Still, because “progressives” aren’t progressive unless they’re progressing toward progress, this nonsensical alphabet soup of sexual deviancy has ballooned to a marvelous “LGBTQQIAAP.”
The latest word salad in the counter-”heterosexist” war against “heteronormativity” (yes, they consider these real things) is “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Allies, and Pansexual.”
In Canada, they’ve added “2S” which means: “Two-spirit. The visionaries and healers of aboriginal (sic) communities, the gay and lesbian shamans.”
I just can’t believe these closed-minded bigots left out members of the mistreated “BDSM” community (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism and Masochism). That’s OK, I guess. Being mistreated is their whole shtick, right? Or maybe they’re covered under “P” for “pansexual.” That means, more or less, that if the mood strikes, you’ll take a roll in the hay with anyone or anything in any way imaginable (or unimaginable).
Speaking of rolls in the hay, don’t put away your alphabet soup decoder ring just yet. It looks like we’ll soon be adding another “B” to the mix.
The late “gay” activist icon Frank Kameny – a pervert before his time – endorsed the practice of bestiality a few years ago. He called sex with animals “harmless,” saying that “as long as the animal doesn’t mind – and the animal rarely does – I don’t mind, and I don’t see why anyone else should.”
So we’ve further lowered the bar from “consenting adults” to “consenting adults and hoofed mammals.” How does that work? Bestiality is OK, but “neigh” means “neigh”?
In today’s frenzied struggle for unfettered sexual license cleverly couched as “civil rights,” we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that oppressed peoples representing all form of “sexual orientation” are lining up for their slice of “equality” pie.
Yes, even, um, animal lovers. According to a recent report by Florida’s Gainesville Sun, for instance, “Lawyers representing a Marion County man accused of sexual activity with a miniature donkey have filed a motion asking a judge to declare the Florida statute banning sexual activities with animals unconstitutional.”
“Carlos R. Romero, 32 … is accused of sexual activities involving animals, a first-degree misdemeanor, after he allegedly was found in a compromising position in August with a female miniature donkey named Doodle.”
First of all, I was offended by the article’s insensitive use of the term “miniature donkey.” I believe, if I’m not mistaken, the preferred nomenclature is “little horse.”
Still, I was especially struck – though not surprised – by the legal arguments Romero’s lawyers ponied up. They claimed “that the statute infringes upon Romero’s due process rights and violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution.”
“By making sexual conduct with an animal a crime, the statute demeans individuals like Defendant (Romero) by making his private sexual conduct a crime,” they wrote.
Right. The statute demeans Romero.
“The personal morals of the majority, whether based on religion or traditions, cannot be used as a reason to deprive a person of their personal liberties,” the attorneys wrote.
This line of argument is directly from the homosexual activist playbook – the rationale adopted by the majority in the landmark Lawrence v. Texas case. In Lawrence, the U.S. Supreme Court manufactured, for the first time in history, a constitutional “right” for men to sodomize each other.
So why not Doodle?
In his characteristically brilliant dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia forecast exactly what’s happened in the decade since: “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices,” he wrote. “Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision.”
Predictably, polygamists and incestuous siblings are now clamoring for so-called “marriage equality” based on Lawrence. At this rate, there’s little doubt they’ll get it.
Once our culture decides, as a matter of course, that all morality is relative, all bets are off. Once we determine, as a matter of law, that people are entitled to special privilege because they subjectively define their identity based upon deviant sexual proclivities and behaviors, moral, legal and cultural anarchy are inevitable.
The brave new world is upon us.
College Allows Transgender Man to Expose Himself to Young Girls
By Todd Starnes. Nov 1, 2012. Click here to read this article on FoxNews.com.
A Washington college said their non-discrimination policy prevents them from stopping a transgender man from exposing himself to young girls inside a women’s locker room, according to a group of concerned parents.
“Little girls should not be exposed to naked men, period,” said David Hacker, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom. A group of concerned parents contacted the legal firm for help.
Hacker said a 45-year-old male student, who dresses as a woman and goes by the name Colleen Francis, undressed and exposed his genitals on several occasions inside the woman’s locker room at Evergreen State College.
Students from nearby Olympia High School as well as children at a local swimming club share locker rooms with the college.
According to a police report, the mother of a 17-year-old girl complained after her daughter saw the transgender individual walking naked in the locker room. A female swim coach confronted the man sprawled out in a sauna exposing himself. She ordered him to leave and called police.
The coach later apologized when she discovered the man was transgendered but explained there were girls using the facility as young as six years old who weren’t used to seeing male genitals.
“They’re uncomfortable with him being in there, her, being in there and are shocked by it,” parent Kristi Holterman told KIRO-TV.
According to the police report, the local district attorney probably will not pursue charges because he said the “criminal law is very vague in this area.”
Francis told KIRO-TV that he was born a man but chose to live as a woman in 2009. Francis said he felt discriminated against after he was told told leave.
“This is not 1959 Alabama,” Francis told the television station. “We don’t call police for drinking from the wrong water fountain.”
Hacker and local parents are outraged over the college’s response to the incident.
“The idea that the college and the local district attorney will not act to protect young girls is appalling,” he said. “What Americans are seeing here is the poisoned fruit of so-called ‘non-discrimination’ laws and policies.”
Placing this man’s proclivities ahead of protecting little girls is beyond unacceptable, Hacker said.
A spokesman for the college did not return calls seeking comment.
Hacker said the college could be held liable for damages if any of the young girls is harmed by the transgendered individual.
“Clearly, allowing a person who is biologically a man to undress and expose himself to young girls places those girls at risk for emotional distress and harm,” he wrote in a letter to the college. “Any reasonable person would view this as dangerous to the young girls involved. The fact that this individual was sitting in plain view of young girls changing into their swimsuits puts you and Evergreen on notice of possible future harm.”
Anybody Can Be, Nobody Has to Be
Originally posted on SoL Blog Thursday, April 26, 2012. Dedicated to my father, W. Scott Barrett, 1925-2009.
A standard argument in favor of embracing the gay identity is that it is not chosen. We agree that under certain conditions, anybody can be tempted towards same sex sexual attraction. But let's think this through. If a desire or temptation corresponds with wrong or harmful acts, whether we choose it or not doesn't really matter. What matters is if we realize it for what it is and choose to beat it.
Do we choose a craving for chocolate? Or a feeling of anger? Or a wicked unkind thought? Probably not. It's just our human nature. The question is, what do we do with these passions? Do we proclaim ourselves hopeless chocolate gluttons? Raging lunatics? Devils? Is that just who we are? Is it okay, even special? Of course not.
If we're serious about health, order, and goodness, what we do is regulate ourselves. If we're religious that means we turn to God. We work at getting our hearts changed. It may be hard work, but we keep at it. If we're serious about God, order, and goodness, there is no giving up or giving in to the weakness.
What's missing in the LDS gay argument we see being swallowed by and emboldening so many these days, is this question:
If this condition or identity, whatever you want to call it, is so difficult, if it upsets family and conflicts with one's religious beliefs and prohibits a normal life, if these things are as important to them as they let on, whether a person felt they chose it or not, wouldn't they try to get help? Instead of clinging to trendy poilitically-charged notions about human sexuality and seeking validation through pornography and gay-affirming individuals and groups, wouldn't they choose to educate themselves from all sides, seek out the best professional help available that fits their religious views, turn to God for motivation, courage, and faith, and never give up? Wouldn't their families support them in conquering their problem?
That's what is so exciting about God's gift of agency. Whatever life deals us, we're free. We're free in our minds and hearts, no matter what. We can choose what we want, and if we truly desire to overcome this or that temptation, if we truly give it up to the Lord, we can be free of it. Because we are weak human beings, it may take time, it may creep up on us, we might get discouraged, it may cause us annoyance, regret, or sorrow, but if we keep truly striving and keep putting the Lord first, a current temptation can become ancient history, freeing us to make improvements in other areas.
Problems arise when people don't really want to give up their unrighteous passions. Sin, even in our minds and hearts, is pleasurable. We get something out of sin or we wouldn't make it a part of us. As foreign as it may sound to those who have been trained toward healthy heterosexuality, same sex lust is pleasurable to those who have learned and continually nourish such thought patterns.
Claiming the gay identity has a great deal of power and support these days. It gets a person a lot of attention and opens up all kinds of passes and possibilities, especially if one is proud, unrepentant, and completely ignores the above truths. In fact, the gay movement has done a great job of stifling discussion on important life issues such as the possibility of overcoming homosexual tendencies. It has done such a good job that ex-gays are denigrated and dismissed. Yes, one can self-identify as gay to rousing applause, but if one self-identifies as ex-gay, here come the tomatoes.
We at SoL are here to present an opposing view to the world's current opinion, that is, that the gay identity is unnatural, disorderly, and harmful. Homosexuality is taught and spread, usually to unwitting young people. We submit that sexual feelings are just feelings, and feelings can and do change direction. Whether you feel as if you chose the feelings and desires or not, you can choose to resist and reorient them toward rightness and an orderly, normal life.
Anybody can be, nobody has to be.
–Janice Barrett Graham
Salt Lake Tribune: Website another sign of
Mormon evolution on gay issues
by Peg McEntee, December 12, 2012
Their voices are tender and loving as they make the case that the LDS Church welcomes members of the LGBT community to a new era of kindness and acceptance.
The voices belong to men and women, gay and straight, who speak on the church’s new website — mormonsandgays.org — beckoning back gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgender Mormons who have lost touch with their faith.
On the site, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints doesn’t back away from its teaching that sex should only be between a husband and a wife. Instead, it reaffirms the current LDS stance — that same-sex attraction isn’t a sin, acting on it is.
Even so, it’s an enormous step. After all, this is a church that once backed reparative therapy for gay boys and men, urged gays to marry women, insisted gays and lesbians weren’t “born that way” and declared that it was sinful to have such “feelings.”
In past years, the Utah-based faith pushed for initiatives, including California’s Proposition 8, to ban gay marriage.
More recently, though, the LDS Church has avoided involvement in such ballot efforts and has endorsed housing and job protections for gay and transgender residents.
It also now recognizes that sexual orientation is innate, and that, as the website says, “The church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.”
For the LDS Church, intolerance, it seems, has given way to understanding. Rather than trying to change LGBT Mormons, members are urged to cherish them.
We live in a time when nine states and the District of Columbia have endorsed same-sex marriage, even as 37 states, including Utah, have laws or constitutional amendments forbidding it. Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear challenges to Prop 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
It is, of course, a religion’s right to guide its members to righteousness. Still, I wonder how many men and women can forswear sexual intimacy, recognized by many faiths as a natural extension of profound love?
Through its new website, the LDS Church explains how.
On it, a gay man tells of his attraction to men, and how, after years of seeking, he ultimately married a woman and became a father. A lesbian recounts her lifelong attraction to women and her ultimate decision, through faith and prayer, to re-immerse herself in the church she loves. A mother talks about her gay son and grandsons and how she loves them as unequivocally as she does her religion.
The LDS Church’s evolving stance recognizes that exclusion is not the way to treat gay people in its own midst. By opening its arms, it provides a spiritual haven for gay believers.
Right now, it may be too much to ask that the faith reconsider its opposition to gay marriage. But maybe LDS leaders — not today, but someday — will come to the conclusion that the law of chastity could accommodate married gay couples who share what the church describes as "the boundaries of commitment and responsibility."
Click here to read this article on the Salt Lake Tribune website.
How to Spot a False Teacher
November 27, 2012
False teachers. They are firmly established among the followers of Christ, presenting themselves as the ultra-faithful and ultra-spiritual. How can we recognize them and their false doctrines? The following, in some combination, are some common characteristics and tenets of false teachers today.
They are typically confident, outspoken, smooth-tongued, young, good-looking, tireless, charismatic, and encourage their own celebrity.
They are driven to spread their false doctrines and succeed in deceiving even the most intelligent and faithful, thereby attaining sponsors.
They choose professions that impact the most people: teaching, writing, journalism, blogging, speaking, counseling and the social sciences.
They are practiced in flattery; they tell people what they like to hear.
They say things to make people feel more comfortable about weaknesses and sins.
They mischaracterize God and subvert truth to allow for weakness and sin.
They focus on feelings rather than truths and on outward acts rather than true religiosity.
They tell a lot of sociological stories that stimulate emotions and pride rather than reflection and humility.
They emphasize the self: self-esteem, self-fulfillment, self-importance, self-determined “truth.”
They dismiss generational wisdom, including discouraging parental guidance of children, in order to restructure an entire people’s religion, morals, traditions, and beliefs.
They presume to hold back realities, truths, and commandments, claiming to know that others are special, incapable, or unprepared for the gospel of Jesus Christ.
They mix in bits of incomplete truths to make their lies more believable. Example: They repeat the truth that “God loves you just the way you are,” but leave out how God wants us to better ourselves from the inside out, which is only possible by humbly relying on Christ, in order to qualify for the greatest of all His gifts: eternal life.
They distort truths. Example: they say no one is perfect, but they present this truth as a consolation and excuse for sin.
They spout scriptures and quotes from authority figures with interpretations that suit their purposes.
They dismiss doctrines, if confronted, which contradict their position, and steer the discussion back to flattery and psychobabble.
They sound more like Oprah Winfrey than they do the Apostle Paul; their ideas more closely follow popular and new-age “spirituality” than true Christianity.
They push personal happiness in a hazy, temporal, light-minded, and self-satisfied sense.
They mostly use soft words in fuzzy, hollow ways like journey, challenges, understanding, manage, diminish, conversation, acceptance, love.
They are virtually silent on the basic gospel principles of agency, sin, repentance, and divine redemption.
They don’t distinguish between things we can change and things we can’t change, or they switch them up.
They don’t talk about sins of the mind and heart. Wicked thoughts and desires are okay as long as hands are clean.
They do a lot of tooting of their own horns, such as how blessed they are to share their experiences, how their “challenges” [read: temptations they continue to cling to] have made them spiritual giants and leaders, how close they are to God, and how they know so much about the Atonement.
They play down the experience of mortality as not needed or particularly defining or significant. (2 Nephi 28: “Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die and it shall be well with us.”)
They claim spiritual growth while advocating weakness and sin (Matthew 6:24: serving two masters?).
They speak more of embracing ourselves as “who we are” than making step-by-step progress.
They reject the gifts of agency and repentance, and the doctrine of restoration (Alma 34:34, Alma 41), proclaiming that God in His time will wrench from us our wayward desires in this life or the next.
They put low expectations on God’s children, disparaging the possibility and individual desire to become new creatures, washed clean and forgiven through Christ.
They suggest that any and all souls will be saved in the end no matter what our character, disposition, or desires may be.
For conscientious members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, many of these false teachings should resound with what the several Book of Mormon anti-Christs preached, who used the very same concepts (and even some of the same exact words) and who were highly successful in leading many of the faithful followers of Christ astray. Now, as modern anti-Christs walk and talk among us like wolves in sheep’s clothing, it will take courage and pure-hearted devotion to the gospel of Jesus Christ to recognize and reject their cunning and worldly sophistries while learning, teaching, and living everlastingly true but now unpopular doctrines.
–Stephen & Janice Graham
We highly recommend this article,
“The Doctrine of Repentance in Salvation,” by Dean Robinson
C.H. Spurgeon once made the statement: "Brethren, we shall not adjust our Bible to the age, but the age to the Bible."
We are living in a day and age where man is taught to think good thoughts, high thoughts, wonderful thoughts about himself. Within the last 20 years or so there has been a covert invasion in Christianity in America without hardly a whimper of protest. This invasion can best be described as "Christian" psychology, which is nothing more than watered-down humanism. While there are millions of people searching for answers to their complicated problems created by their increasingly complex lives, psychology comes along and attempts to answer and solve man's sin problems and its consequences through the building up and restoration of man's self-esteem and self-image. We are told today to get in touch with our inner self and ask the question: "How do you feel about yourself?" The bottom line is, it doesn't amount to a hill of beans what we think or feel about ourselves, but what does the Bible say and teach.
This matrimony between psychology and Christianity has created an unholy alliance which is producing some strange children that are permitting, promoting, and preaching deceiving, dangerous, and damnable false doctrines. This diabolical psychobabble of self-love is sweeping through churches today among self-seeking men in a self-centered society whose greatest problem is a desire to worship at the altar of self. The apostle Paul warned us that one of the characteristics of the last days would be that "men shall be lovers of their own selves" (2 Tim. 3:2).
I'm afraid many so-called fundamental/evangelical churches and preachers have fallen into the trap of teaching this mushy self-worth propaganda that seeks to camouflage itself in robes of charity and tolerance. Churches and preachers alike are abandoning their God-called purpose of holding up the mirror of God's Word and graphically revealing to man what he really looks like in the sight of a holy God. The missing message in modern-day preaching is the Biblical doctrine of repentance, where a sinner is convinced and convicted of his exceeding sinfulness and lost condition.
Obama Campaign Ad Equates Voting with Sex
October 26, 2012
Now we’ve seen everything. Paid for in the millions by Obama for America, the Obama Campaign has released an ad called “Your First Time” in which an actress compares voting for the first time with having premarital sex for the first time, alluding to having sex with someone comparable to President Obama. We think this shocking and suggestive ad, targeting young women, is pornographic in nature. Conservative commentators such as Mark Levin are calling it “contemptible and sick, that the president is dragging this election more and more into the gutter.”
Said Levin on his Oct. 25 radio show, “This election is “not about copulation . . . except of course if you’re Obama and his team and they think this is going to persuade you to vote for [him]. I’m starting to think . . . that these people are perverts. I’m starting to think that these people have a sexual obsession problem. Endless talk of contraceptives . . there’s something wrong with these people. And they think there’s something wrong with you.”
We agree. Sad to say, there are those among us who would like nothing better than an America made weak and easy to control by being enslaved by their own depravities, and so they pander and coddle them to their advantage. People like Sandra Fluke are mere pawns.
Introducing PFOX: Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays October 26, 2012
We would like you to know our friends at PFOX with whom we have enjoyed association for more than a decade. This vibrant organization of untiring, courageous individuals supports families, advocates for the ex-gay community, and educates the public on sexual orientation based on all aspects of human experience including science, family relations, and multiple religious denominations.
“PFOX families unconditionally love their children,” states their mission statement, and we have seen this for ourselves, whether their family members are continually involved in the gay lifestyle or have left it behind, and their children know it. Leaders of PFOX include those whose children are acting out and those individuals who have lived the gay lifestyle for decades and subsequently rejected it and reoriented to heterosexuality through therapy and faith.
The PFOX website contains news alerts, videos, resources, great articles, and true redemption testimonials of those who have changed from unwanted homosexuality to their natural heterosexuality. One story is about a man who underwent a degree of sex-change treatments, but who later changed his mind and was helped by PFOX to reverse the treatments and embrace his natural maleness and masculinity.
Excellent brochures such as “Prevent Bullying at your School;” “Can Sexual Orientation Change?”; “Tolerance for the Ex-Gay Community;” and “Gender Identity Disorder,” are available for downloading and printing for distribution to churches, schools, universities, libraries, exhibit booths, counselors’ offices, diversity centers, etc. It makes sense that the “inclusion of the ex-gay message is the way to spread the word that change is possible and tolerance [respect] for those who have changed is necessary.”
PFOX focuses on the realities that “No one is born gay! There are thousands of ex-gays, Anyone can decide to change, It’s your life and your decision,” which are rejected and ignored by most mainstream media, news organizations, and schools, and vilified by the gay community that supposedly promotes diversity and self-determination.
Thank you PFOX! Keep up the good work!
The Pornified and Prostituted Child
Book Review of Renting Lacy by Linda Smith
October 26, 2012
“Who are these men, and sometimes women, who lust after a child?” That is the sickening crux of the problem of child sex trafficking, for if there were no demand for it, it would not exist. This dark, cruel and inhuman subculture is exposed in Linda Smith’s book, Renting Lacy which we received at the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit in Washington D. C. recently as we attended a breakout session. Linda spoke on this topic along with a former victim of child sex slavery who has become an advocate for those enslaved today.
Aside from the selfish dismissing, despising, and destroying of the unborn, we can hardly think of anything as wicked as the sexualization, indoctrination, and exploitation of children for adult greed and perverse sexual pleasure.
What we learned right off is that child sex trafficking is not, as most have heard, an international problem occurring only outside of the United States or to foreign children brought into the U. S. No, it is a domestic problem, too, here, in our cities and towns where victims are harvested from our neighborhoods, schools, and churches. “[T]here are over 100,000 domestic child sex trafficking victims in the USA each year — 100,000 or more who don’t come in from other countries . . . our own children.” Victims are mostly girls, but boys also. And the customers? Heterosexual, and undoubtedly also homosexual.
Writes Smith,“[M]en in any country, our own included, don’t usually travel far to buy a trafficked child. In any area where buying sex is ‘normalized,’ local men buy — unhindered by legal penalty or public shame.” Indeed, “child sex slavery can only happen in countries, regions, and communities that have developed a culture of tolerance for commercial sex.” Bingo. That is us. Smith further reports that “minor sex trafficking is a burgeoning criminal enterprise in America” and that “gangs are turning to prostituting minors as a less risky source of revenue than drug trafficking or other crimes.”
Why, why, why young children? is the inevitable, heart-wrenching question. Smith gives us at least part of the answer: We did not realize that child pornography, an addictive marketing tool for sex trafficking, “depicts children enjoying sexual acts, and buyers want to experience what they’ve seen” (emphasis ours). “[C]hild porn is widespread, and video images of younger and younger victims lead buyers to demand younger and younger victims in order to fulfill the fantasies ignited . . . ”
Smith takes us on a horrifying journey alongside several of these victims, girls as young as 11. “Girls who haven’t reached puberty. Children who should be in fifth grade. Many have never attended a school dance. Never learned how to use a locker. Never pondered a class schedule.”
Like an unwitting toddler is lured with candy by a kidnapper, particularly vulnerable adolescent girls are gradually lured by a good-looking guy called a “spotter.” The spotter stalks them, flatters them, buys them clothes, promises a grandiose future, and wins their unfailing devotion until these girls will do anything for him, even give their bodies to strange men to supply the money he needs. Thus is the young girl initiated. Said a former child sex trafficking victim from Atlanta, Georgia, “ I met this guy and he said he was going to take care of me.”
“Porn is then used to train a child in how to behave, what to say, how to sound, how to seem. Children are forced to watch and learn.” The child’s spirit is inevitably broken through a combination of repeated “psychological manipulation; intimidation; gang rape; sodomy; beatings; deprivation of food or sleep; isolation from family, friends, and other sources of support; and threatening” of loved ones. After this “training” period, these young girls are easily “sold,” often to numerous customers per night. To quote a former child sex trafficking victim from Kansas City, Missouri, “The first 20 or so times were the hardest. Then you sort of get used to it and you don’t think as much about it.”
The young girl learns to pick out sexy outfits, is treated to getting her nails and hair done, even to breast implants. Often she is “in love” with her pimp, though he uses and abuses her in every way including taking all the money she receives from customers. As such, these young girls may not look or behave like victims, but they most certainly are. To point out how brainwashed these victims are, Smith tells the true story of one girl who was found several states away and returned to her grandmother, but who then ran away and returned to her pimp the first chance she got.
This is the author’s message: that these kids are individuals with heart-breaking stories, products molded and manufactured for the lively and lucrative marketplace of child prostitution, young people in endless supply who desperately need rescuing physically, psychologically, spiritually. What can be done? Smith, highly involved in lawmaking circles, outlines seven steps toward awareness, rescue and rehabilitation, and punishments for predators. She emphasizes that blame must fall where it belongs: not on the child on the street as it now does (the child is the one who gets arrested), but on the degenerate customers who get away with hired child sex, the pimps, and the facilitators.
More and better laws and policies may certainly help here and there. But as Smith points out, it’s our culture, the public resolve, that must change. The permissive, depraved, self-indulgent, oversexed, perverse world we are living in today has lit up the road to child sex slavery like the Las Vegas strip. What did we expect?
It seems that even if that portion of our national posterity escapes being destroyed before it can be born, it is then in danger of being robbed of innocence and virtue, that which is most precious next to life itself. Traditional moral values (which come from God) regarding human worth and dignity along with proper marriage as the only natural and right context for sex and sexuality, need a society-wide comeback or child sex slavery will only increase no matter what laws are on the books.
Click here to read about Renting Lacy. Click here to order Renting Lacy by Linda Smith for half price. Click here to learn about Shared Hope International, which exists to prevent and eradicate sex trafficking and slavery through education and public awareness.
They That Be With Us, Part Three
October 14, 2012
Here is our final report of the speeches we heard at the Values Voter Summit sponsored by the Family Research Council in Washington D. C. in September, although we will be further reporting on an important break-out session we attended and doing a review or two on books we were given there. If you have the time, we suggest that you watch the video of these speeches for yourself at the Values Voter Summit website. Now that we are energized and inspired toward truth, faith, confidence, patriotism, and action, perhaps the most important things we can all do are share what we know with others, of course vote, and urge everyone within our sphere of influence throughout the nation and those serving in the military outside the country to register and vote next month. Now is the time to take courage, pray for the Spirit, talk to others about important issues, and stand for truth and righteousness.
Kamal Saleem, former terrorist
He had his first terror assignment toward Israel at age 7. In his late teens he was converted to Christianity, and to God be the glory for that. He quoted Matt 24:4 about being deceived. Ishmael hated Abraham, was deceived and received a new, orphan spirit, which taught him to hate God. He quoted Psalms 33:9-12. Blessed is the people whose God is the Lord. Isaiah said kings and queens will lift you up. Deut 10:8. The presence of the Lord blesses the people. In Obama we chose a king instead of the King of Kings. The presence of the Lord is a must. As a boy he dreamed about killing Jews and Christians, as he was taught by his mother. He was indoctrinated in the mosque. He was taught how to marry and infiltrate nations. He was trained by the Islamic brotherhood, then the PLO. They tried putting explosive belts on sheep. When a friend died in a terrorist attack, the mother celebrated his death. Europeans have no passion for their people like radical Islamists do. They are intent on setting up an Islamic culture in Europe. He came to America to establish an Islamic civilization and jihad. But God had a different story for Kamal. Colleges are a jihadist’s playground. America slept while they worked. He was in an accident and was sent to the Christian surgeon’s home to recover. They were the Living God to him. You each are the walking Living God to others. He was astonished when the wife asked her husband to clean bathroom. In Islam women don’t tell men to help. Allah and Jehovah are not the same god. Our God came to serve us. He said that he learned liberty comes from the Bible. Everything about freedom in America was birthed from the Bible. Because of those Christians he lives in liberty, and nobody tells him how to live his life, including Barack Obama. To God be the glory. Here in Christianity he learned the power of forgiveness. Your God goes before you day and night. Nothing shall harm you, for I am Jehovah, God Almighty. He recovered from his injury and asked to stay with the Christian family. They made him their nanny. He prayed to Allah, speak to me. Nothing. He prayed to God. He spoke to me. He is a living God. How do you kill a terrorist? Introduce them to Jesus. You in America are the light on the hill. You are the breadbasket of the world. You send food. You send soldiers to give freedom. He said, “I salute the military in the name of the Living God. You are our heroes. When the President bows the knee before foreign kings, he recognizes that king's authority over us. There is a proposed UN resolution 1618 on hate crimes, to make speaking against Islam a crime. He quoted from Ecclesiastes. There is a time for everything: To be born, to mourn, to dance, for war, for peace. The war we’re in now is not by rifle. Now it is to vote and set people free. We should vote for those who choose the Lion of God, the Savior of the people. This the time to make a difference. God needs you.
Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General, Virginia
We cannot be anything but vigilant on the topics of liberty and life. There is tension built into our constitutional system. When there aren’t enough politicians to curtail the federal government, it’s up to the states. The Federalist papers 25-31 are worth reading concerning the role of states in the system they set up. The government is working to steal freedom at an unprecedented rate. Obama thinks he can force America to buy things just like King George– our own president whom we elected! Can the federal government regulate commerce by forcing us to buy a product? This is an incredible invasion of liberty. Doing nothing is being called “economic activity,” [as in wanting to refrain from buying health insurance]. The government has power to regulate your decision, your thinking, your choice not to buy heath care. It’s about liberty, not heath care. The Supreme Court agreed with us on the commerce clause, but then said it was a tax. No judge in America held that this was a tax until the Supreme Court. One judge changed everything. The tax (because it’s a tax now) can be repealed by a simple majority in the U.S. Senate, rather than the usual 60 votes. Supreme Court appointments are critical to finally get nine people who will read the Constitution instead of write their own. This is true for the lower courts as well. It’s so important to prevent these bad ideas, because it’s harder to get out of bad programs. We need an outbreak of freedom in government. He calls the EPA “the employment prevention agency.”FCC is trying to regulate the internet. They call it net neutrality. If they say neutral, it isn’t. In the face of a court order to the contrary, they are doing this. They ignore the rule of law. If the president, who promised to uphold our laws, is the greatest lawbreaker of all . . .
Rick Santorum, former Senator from Pennsyvania and former presidential candidate
Three Ps: Pray (always first), Prepare (register to vote), Participate (vote).
If Obamacare is allowed, our country will be very different. It’s about who we are as America. “There’s a lot more at stake in this country than just economics,” such as what’s happening in the Middle East. Obama has coddled and appeased every country that wants to do us and Israel harm. And turned his back on our friends. He’s said, if you are a friend you’re on your own, If you’re our enemy let’s talk. He doesn’t believe in business, family, or faith; he just believes in government to do more until we’re all equal. He wants international organizations to be the arbiters. The future of America is decline. The media likes what he does, his abuse of power. They ought to be careful because there may come an abuse even they don’t like. This president did what the law says he cannot do. He acted like an emperor, not a president, and when that happens we can not longer be a republic. Name one country in which respect for America has grown in the last four years. They don’t respect weakness. The economy works when we work, not when the people in Washington work. We have a president who doesn’t talk about our founding principles. He just talks about all the things they are going to give you. Understand that when the government gives you something they can take it away and tell you how you must use it. This is how it takes away freedom. Our founders gave us a model that transformed the world. It’s been copied around the world to some extent. One result is that life expectancy has increased. Two institutions, the church and the family, are our only hope. They say we don’t want to talk about social issues. But without family and church there are no conservative values and founding principles. It is our job to spread this among those who believe in American values. It is our watch. We must pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to each other. We have to do what God has called us to do. This is the most important election we will ever know. I feel blessed to be here when my country needs me.
Lila Rose, President, Live Action
[Lila Rose is a young woman who started an organization that has exposed corruption at Planned Parenthood clinics on video such as false statements by executives, PP assisting sex traffickers, not reporting sexual abuses, and breaking sex-selection abortion laws. Planned Parenthood receives a huge chunk of its funds from the federal government, that is, our tax dollars.]
A war on women? Do we need to duck and cover? There is a problem, women are in danger, but not because women can’t get free birth control or abortions. It’s the unborn women being destroyed. The real current war is to destroy our beliefs. When we stop valuing life we lose everything. Mother Thereas said, in a nation in which a mother will kill her own children, what is left but for us to kill one another? Story of Tonya Reeves: She went to Planned Parenthood to seek an abortion. (They kill over 300,000 children a year.) The abortion was botched; she was bleeding internally. But PP is careful about their image, about marketing, public relations, dismantling others they don’t like. They didn’t want to embarrass themselves with an ambulance coming. So they waited several hours and didn’t tell anyone that something was wrong. Tonya was finally taken to a hospital where she died that day. And this is about women’s health??? This is the real war on women. Our current administration is pushing more and more extreme abortion measures. Hospitals are practicing infanticide by letting babies born alive by botched abortions die. And then there’s sex-selective abortion which Obama supported. It’s a war on baby girls. So Live Action went under cover. Our actor told the PP worker that she was pregnant and wanted an abortion because it was a girl and she wanted a boy. The PP worker told our actor she could have an abortion for any reason she wanted. Four states have laws against sex-selection abortion. PP openly breaks the law. Romney has pledged to defund PP. We need women who value life and liberty. When we get the facts out we can take our country back, a country that protects the right to life.
Religious Liberty Panel: Lt. Gen. (ret.) William Boykin, Former Commander, Delta Force; Mike Johnson, Esq., Liberty Institute; Todd Starnes, FOX News
The bedrock upon which all our other freedoms rest is religious freedom. The Founders believed that a man whose religious convictions were oppressed could never be a good citizen. Now our first amendment freedom is being turned upside down. It’s time to turn it right side up. Does the first amendment protect your private religious expression? A judge warned against praying in Medina Valley High School in Texas when Angela Hildenbrand [she was also on the panel] wanted to pray in her valedictory address. An anti-prayer family brought the suit. She actually faced possible incarceration. The Liberty Institute helped her sue and the court awarded her the right to pray. Finally there are Christians standing up for their rights. It’s an all-out assault that is getting worse, but we can win this war if we aren’t afraid. It’s all about intimidation, but we usually win when we stand up. There is absolutely, unequivocally, a war against Christianity in this country. Federal authorities are now investigating a film maker over his film. This is not about a film. It’s about free speech. If any gov. official can tell anyone what to say according to their conscience, what is to stop them from calling any minister and telling him to tone down his sermon on gay marriage, or whatever? Jesus was an extremely controversial figure. Young people have to be ready at a moment’s notice to profess their beliefs.
Lt. General William Boykin was invited to speak generally on faith to cadets at West Point. A
protest came from American Islamic Relations (a front for the Muslim Brotherhood in America), and he got uninvited. Then an Islamic radical was asked to speak at Fort Hood! [This is the Texas army base at which the radical Islamist shot 12 and wounded 31 in Nov. 20011.] Karl Marx’s goal was to dethrone God and destroy capitalism. Maybe these people don’t call themselves Marxists but these are their beliefs and goals. What we are seeing is Marxism, destroying the idea of a sovereign God to insert government, so people will depend on government instead of God.
Todd Starnes at foxnews.com/toddstarnes tells stories everyday of people facing attack because of their belief in Jesus. A group of 12-13-year-old school children from Arizona on a field trip were praying in front of the U. S. Supreme Court Building when police immediately descended on them and told them they couldn’t pray there. So they stood in the gutter of our nation’s capitol and prayed. Just preaching the gospel is becoming dangerous. Where is the outrage when Christians are subjected to the humiliation coming out of Hollywood?
Mike Johnson told how people are actually saying crazy things now like the mention of the name of Jesus is evil. Religion and morality are our essential supports. Without religious freedom there is no political freedom. In postmodernism truth is replaced by tolerance. Christianity says there is one way, one truth, one light. The claims of Christianity have always been offensive to some people. We don’t have the luxury of complacency any longer. Even just a few years ago we didn’t have to do what we have to do now, that is, fight for our religious rights.
Here are more of our notes from the Values Voter Summit, Washington DC, Sept., 2012.
Please note that the following speeches are full of religious beliefs and Christian family values coming out of the mouths of American leaders, state governors, national political candidates, and members of the U. S. House of Representatives. Yes, some people in these positions do speak this way — in public, in a fine hotel in the middle of our nations’s capitol with the national press covering every word. We find this exercise of religious freedom extremely refreshing, which is sad because it should be commonplace. Religious speech is our first freedom and is always alive and well at this conference. But we at SoL fear that religious/morality speech is being forfeited on every level through cultural and governmental secularization, political correctness, and pressure from powerful special interest groups. Do you hear your local church and community leaders, politicians, and elected officials speaking like the following? And if not, why not?
Tim Wildmon, President of the American Family Association
[We were shown a video spot: a spelling bee at which the child is given the word “person.” She asks for a definition but the facilitator can’t give one. Another word, “marriage,” is given and the same thing happens. The facilitator cannot give the child a definition of marriage. This shows how the things that are clearly evident to right-thinking people are being lost. This video was produced in support of legislation in some states which defines a person to include unborn children. The opposition denies that babies in the womb can be defined as persons. Click here to view the video, "Defining the Obvious." Also don’t miss another video spot, “Aaron.”]
Some Christians are still not involved in government affairs. They leave it to the rest of us to get down in the dirt. God expects us all to be involved. We are commanded to spread the good news of Christ. AFA proclaims the gospel every day on 200 radio stations. In addition to evangelism, much more is required. Jesus said to be salt and light. Do good works, be a witness for Christ. It is foolishness for Christians to get out of politics. Shall we leave lawmaking to unbelievers? This is all the more reason for believers to be involved, so we can have a better chance to have influence on the making of laws. If the Christian community won’t speak out about Christian values, no one else will. Alexis deTocqueville wrote a book on life in America in 1831 [Democracy in America]. He wrote about the great, the good, the bad, the ugly. He said the nation is suspended on the 7th day; everyone and families attend church where they are reminded to check desires, study scriptures, about the infinite goodness of God, and man’s responsibility. Religion is necessary for the state as well as individuals. It should dominate the culture. It’s the glue that holds society together. George Washington said the same thing. Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In 1950 Harry Truman gave a speech on organized crime. There had been an increase in crime along with crime organizations. He said to use the people’s sense of morality that comes from religion to put down organized crime. If there is a proper environment at home, fewer turn out wrong. The basis of our Bill of Rights comes from Matthew, Moses and Isaiah. Truman, a democrat, said the basis of our government is religion. Christianity is the glue that holds America together. If you take away religion, you take away the glue, and America falls apart.
Bob McDonell, Governor of Virginia
He served in the military for 21 years. Virginia is the cradle of democracy beginning with Jamestown in 1607. Character does count. It is indispensable to the welfare of the nation. Principles of freedom are needed today as much as before. Freedoms come from God; governments are instituted to protect those rights. Article 1, section 8, spells out the only things Congress is authorized to do. What we should be about are faith, family, and individual responsibility. But what we have are government debt, unemployment, fewer entrepreneurs, stagnated economy. In Republican-governed states like Virginia where the principles of freedom work, you find lower unemployments, lower taxes, fewer govt. employees. It’s time to get America back on the right course. We can stay where we are with more govt., more regulation, more taxes. Or we can quit blaming and take responsibility, apply ourselves. We are heading rapidly in the wrong direction as a nation. Sixteen trillion in debt. If we spend more than we take in for enough time, we go broke. It can be fixed, as WI, OH, VA have done. In VA, we cut back. Now we have a 1.4 billion dollar surplus, from the 6 billion dollar deficit when I took office from a Democratic governor. We even cut taxes. We have a pro-business climate. Govt must get out of the way. We’re not afraid to say that our rights come from Almighty God. We shouldn’t be voting to put God back into our stated positions. [This refers to the infamous vote at the recent DNC.] We should acknowledge the rightful role of God as author of our liberties. God is mentioned in the Republican platform 10 times. We need to stand up for marriage and for innocent life. I am asking you to get in and actually work to protect those freedoms. All of you are opinion leaders: the ½ of 1% of Americans who realize democracy isn’t a spectator sport. For the next 55 days talk to neighbors, put up signs, send out emails, make phone calls. Romney/Ryan need your help. Spend time. Get out of your comfort zone. Make the sacrifice. Protect the values of our country. Those of you who own, work for, or support business: talk to employees, suppliers, customers. Which candidate’s policies are better for business? Who you elect makes a difference. George Washington reminded us of what America is all about. In his first inaugural address he said that the smiles of heaven cannot be expected on those who ignore the principles upon which freedom is based. Values are important, character counts. This is an incredibly important election.
Ted Cruz, Republican candidate for U. S. Senate from Texas
As a young boy he recited the Constitution from memory to earn money for scholarships.
There are four threats to America. The first is economic security. Federal spending is out of control. We can look at Europe and see where this will take us. Next is our national security which is threatened by radicals throughout the world. Islamic terrorists would murder every one of us, and yet our President won’t even utter the words: radical Islamist terrorists. Bullies and tyrants don’t respect weakness. Our founders didn’t say: our rights are being trampled; we’d like to sit down and have some tea. We must stand with our ally Israel. Pres. Obama was too busy to meet with Israel’s Prime Minister but will appear on the David Letterman Show. The third threat is to our religious liberties. Americans are in essence being told to change your religious beliefs or the president will use his power to shut down your hospitals. The Democratic party removed from their stated platform reference to God and the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. At the recent DNC they voted on this change three times and the 3rd time I thought I heard a rooster crow. [Laughter from Values Voter crowd.] The “vote” was clearly divided and passed to boos. Do these people reflect your values? The fourth threat is to the Constitution. the Supreme Court teeters in the balance right now. There is something incredible sweeping the nation. It took Jimmy Carter to give us Ronald Reagan. Maybe Barack Obama will result in a new generation of Republican leaders.Together we will restore liberty.
Gary Bauer, President, American Values
It has been a very bad week for our country. A U. S. ambassador and others were brutally murdered. Radical Islam chanted, “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama’s now.” In other words, we are going to kill Americans. What can lay us low is the weak, vapid response from our government. We’re told we have to be very worried and careful about the sensitive psyches of the Muslims. Remember how Muslims celebrated 911 and what they did to Daniel Pearl. There have been more mosques built in the U. S. in the last 11 years since 9/11 than in any other 11 years. If only other countries treated Christians that well! The cause of the mobs is radical Islam, not some film or cartoon. When is the last time we heard the present administration mention Judeo-Christian/western civilization? America’s God is not the god of the Koran. Places that operate under the Koran are not pleasant places to live – to women, to minorities, to freedom of conscience. The central idea of western civilization is the sanctity of life at all phases. It is not an accident that America and Israel are hated by the same groups. Why weren’t embassies reinforced when they were warned? Why is the president not attending his daily morning intelligence briefings? He only attends 45%. If George Bush flew to a fundraiser on a week like this the media would be talking about it until the election. What happened at the DNC was incredibly important. God and Jerusalem were on trial. The Democratic party today is not pro-Israel like it used to be. We have the most anti-Israel president ever.
It used to be that abortion wasn’t something to be happy about like other freedoms. It was hoped that abortions would be rare. What other freedoms are hoped to be rare? Freedom of speech rare? Freedom of religion rare? They took rare out of legalized abortion four years ago. Now it’s something to be celebrated. They ought to be ashamed.
Steve King (R-Iowa), U.S. House of Representatives
There was a recent attempt by a government agency to remove all religious materials, Bibles included, from Walter Reed Hospital. No longer could anything religious be made available, or even handed out on visits, to wounded soldiers. This, when these soldiers have been fighting for that very constitutional right! The rule was rescinded the following day after King spoke against it.
The Religious Liberty Reciprocity Act is a new law passed by Congress that says that just as the U. S. respects the religious freedoms and beliefs of people visiting from other countries, we require that those countries respect the religious rights of Americans visiting their countries.
President Obama has violated the Constitution by undermining the rule of law and separation of powers. He has done great violence to the Constitution. As we work on undoing these violations, hundreds more violations are happening such as the executive edicts regarding immigration. The most egregious is what he has done to religious freedom. Directly against most American’s religious beliefs, employers, through their insurance companies, including those owned by religious organizations, are being required to provide sterilizations, free contraceptives and abortifacient drugs to every one of their employees. He is essentially running over the people by legislating by press conference! Our solution comes in November. The most sovereign thing we have is our soul. This president hasn’t figured how to nationalize the soul yet, but is nationalizing everything else. Obama and his minions are chiseling away at the pillars of the shining city on a hill.
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), U.S. House of Representatives
The best way the U.S. can help Israel is to stay strong. Israel is a better place to be when the USA leads. This administration is doing everything wrong. If you want to lead, you’d better be right on the principles and values such as fiscal policy, health care policy, education policy. We need a new tax code. Everyone agrees. The tax code is broken and stupid. At some point we’re going to have to spend less money. If debt goes up, we will soon be paying more in interest than on defense. In the musical play, 1776, John Adams says it’s a revolution, dang it, we’re going to have to offend somebody. Romney is the man to make the cuts, regardless of who has to be offended. The reason for lowering taxes is to let people have more of their own money to spend on their kids and grandkids. If we want to do things that really matter, it won’t be easy. Every third generation has had to do something big. Revolution, Civil War, WWII. Now its our turn. Wright brothers made the first powered flights and 44 years later we were breaking sound barrier, and then 22 years later we landed on the moon. “If the press ain’t saying anything bad about you, you’re probably not doing anything good.” I get up in the morning and read my Bible to see what each side is up to. Paul the apostle fought the fight and finished the course. We are people of action. That’s what’s required at this time in history. If you do the right thing, you come out on the other side and things are better.
If you have more time, we urge you to view these excellent speeches at the Values Voter Summit website. You won’t want to miss Part 3, our next email concluding our report on the Values Voter Summit speeches.
They That Be With Us, Part One
September 23, 2012
Synopses of Speeches from 2012 Values Voter Summit, Washington D. C.
“And [Elisha] answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them” (2 Kings 6:16). This is the feeling we always get when we attend the Values Voter Summit each year and it’s absolutely true, and yet the liberal establishment press would have us conservative patriots think the opposite. We wish you all could have been there to see for yourselves. Following are our own summaries and observations of several of the speeches we heard. Hear all the speakers for yourself at the Values Voter Summit website.
We need to go back to what made us a great nation in the first place. Cameron went to England and traced the pilgrims’ route. John Robinson, their leader, was the founding father of the founding fathers. He taught them the principles used in Mayflower compact: free enterprise, faith in god, power in the churches and communities, a nation built from the inside out. Kirk recalls that he was never taught this in school. He was taught that our country came from Greeks and others. Our country is utterly unique in the history of the world and we are beneficiaries of it. Monumental is a new movie he has made. Change two letters in abortion and you get adoption. The unborn child waiting for its first breath, its first step, its first day at school. Pledge to pray for the nation and the upcoming election. Help friends and family to register and then vote their conscience.
This “war on women” we are hearing about is not a true war. A real war going on across the world is Muslims against the West. Today Christians all over the world are being persecuted for their beliefs, even for going to church. Attacks are occurring in Egypt, Libya, Yemen. The present administration’s response shows lack of resolve. They want to restrict freedom of speech; we won’t stand for it. Not all Muslims are radical, but there is a wing of them who want the destruction of Israel and its allies. Media is scrambling to make sure Obama is not blamed. Obama’s first interview as President was with a Muslim news outlet. The Muslim Brotherhood was given front row seats to Obama’s Cairo speech. The Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt’s leadership, said Jerusalem will be their capital. The Organization for Islamic Cooperation is the 2nd largest non-governmental organization after the UN. It claims to speak for all Muslims. It wants a world-wide speech code which would criminalize speech deemed by them to be insulting to Islam. That is what motivated attacks this week. The attacks at U.S. sites are a violation of our 1st amendment right of free speech. The Obama administration has ordered that the FBI, CIA, etc. be retrained to be more respectful to Islam, at the demand of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation. Bachmann asked who was behind demand and was told that info is closed, classified. UN needs to be told we will stop funds if they keep passing pro-Muslim resolutions. Also must stop granting visas to recognized terrorists to come to the US and visit the White House. Obama is meeting with David Letterman, Beyonce, and Jayzee, when he should be meeting with the prime minister of Israel. We need to stand for freedom, righteousness, truth. This administration will not admit who the real enemy is. Obama’s strategy is one of defeat. Appeasement doesn’t work. The administration should say: we will not tolerate attacks on the U. S. and its citizens, and you do so at your own peril. Victory is the only goal of war. We need to live by the three words: duty, honor, country. Obama has been the most dangerous president we’ve ever had.
Eric Cantor, House Majority Leader
This is the most important election in our lifetime. It’s about something more than the economy; it’s about: whether or not the moral fabric of our country will be upheld or torn apart. Thomas Jefferson was about life liberty, etc, we are about life. No taxpayer money should be used to kill innocent life. We must stand up and stand tall as a strong pro-life majority in House. We need a president and a senate who will stand up with us in defense of life and guarantee the right to practice our faith. Faith is not something to shrink from but something to protect. Now many Americans are being forced to sue the government in order to practice our faith. This is crazy and why we must repeal Obamacare, “downright an issue of religious liberty.” The fight for religious freedom starts here at home because we are “one nation under God.” People pursue happiness through individual effort, not through government. We stand with parents and children against the encroaching power of employee unions. (Current Chicago teachers strike.) We need leaders who will stand by our allies in times of need. There is one ally under threat who needs America: Israel. (This received a standing ovation from the audience.) We need leaders who will stand for these values. Take this home, where you live, work, worship.
Abraham Lincoln read two books: The Bible and Shakespeare. From Macbeth: “I think our country sinks beneath the yoke; It weeps, it bleeds; and each new day a gash is added to her wounds.” Today our country’s woes include welfare, unemployment, debt. These are gashes that would not be forgiven if they were in our charge. These burdens are more than economic, but cultural and spiritual. Our morale as a nation reveals the shining city on the hill is growing dim. More Americans than not think we are in decline as a nation. American achievement is ending! This is the worst thing our president has done to us. People are acting as if our own constitutional freedoms go too far. Our government is weak. It sympathized with those who waged the recent attacks (on American embassy in Egypt.) On the other hand, when something is blasted by the establishment press it is likely it is true. Romney denounced the terrorists instead of offering flimsy excuses. The press jumps in to kill truth in the womb, something that is now practiced regularly. Courage is the secret of democracy.
Paul Ryan, Vice Presidential Candidate
(Twice during this speech there were outbursts we couldn’t make out from detractors in the audience. The crowd immediately began chanting “USA, USA, USA” and the detractors were quickly escorted out of the conference by the Secret Service.) In 53 days we have a choice to decide what kind of country we want. We will choose from two very different ideologies. A mixed signal only makes our enemies bolder. We need steady, consistent leadership, firmness of purpose. America keeps the peace, prevents crises. Obama treats private enterprise as a resource for government funding. After 4 years of dividing people the country is only worse off. No government has ever been able to do for people what people have been able to do for themselves. We are at risk of becoming a poor country. Obama says government is the only thing we all belong to. What? Public servants do not take an oath to the government, but to the Constitution. The most important things we belong to have a different kind of hold on us. We Americans give ourselves to every kind of good cause, we fill a place that no one else can fill. America is carried forward by people doing good things. This is how life works in a civil society, in a free country. Abuse of government power ruins this. Private institutions are brushed aside with contempt. You would be hard pressed to find a institution that does more for women and their babies than the Catholic church. Obamacare is an insult to every religious group. We will repeal that mandate and all of Obamacare. Obama says we’re all in this together and yet has never once lifted a hand in defending the most helpless of human beings, the child waiting to be born. Abortion was hoped to be safe, legal and rare in Clinton’s time. Now abortion is totally unrestricted. We don’t write anyone off. Every child counts and has a place in this world. In a just society, government should stand on the side of life. Do we want a country where everything is free but us? Mitt Romney is the type of man we see in our own communities who is there helping in person.
--Stephen & Janice Graham
Also, on the News Links section in the left column of this website homepage, we have some new entries to recommend to you.
1. An excellent article "Tolerance and Reciprocity," by Anthony Esolen, will help explain why tolerance is not just a one-way street. "[I]t is a small step from approving the brave fellow who makes his temptation conspicuous and conspicuously averts the sin, to suggesting that perhaps the sin isn't really so bad after all, if such a conspicuously virtuous fellow is tempted by it. That too is an offense against tolerance. It is to make one's neighbor always aware of his tolerance: to weary him with it, to pester him little by little into giving in, because it is so much easier to condone than to tolerate. So it is that the most intolerant among us frequently preach about tolerance-to nag their opponents into submission, and to get their way."
2. The Deseret News has a welcome article on research done by Mark Regnerus on how grown children of same-sex couples compare to those of father-mother families.
September 19, 2012
In No Uncertain Terms:
Values Voter Summit September 14-16, 2012
Living day to day in a mainstream culture that has all but sold its soul at the price of its own future, how refreshing it is to attend the Family Research Council’s annual conference along with thousands of like-minded patriotic believers!
For the past seven years Standard of Liberty has attended the Values Voter Summit in Washington DC sponsored by all the top conservative groups in the country, including the Heritage Foundation, American Family Association, Focus on the Family, Liberty Counsel and more.
Our friends at PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) had a booth in the Exhibition Hall promoting the truth about homosexuality and the possibility of change. Please read on their website and then go here to sign a petition to present to Fox News urging that they find an ethical spokesperson for the liberal view of sexuality and cease giving a forum to Wayne Besen, a radical homosexual activist who uses inflammatory and hateful language to promote lies and possibly incite violence against conservatives, repentant homosexuals, and ex-gays, exploiting his appearances for fund-raising. (Standard of Liberty can testify to this man’s tactics. The most vile email we have ever received came from Wayne Besen, a perfect stranger to us.)
PFOX also has a new piece,“Is Someone in Your Church ‘Gay’? The ABCs of How to Respond.” This is timely information. Indeed, we spoke to several people at the conference this year who are heartbroken and up-in-arms about how their various churches and ministers are giving in to the homosexual movement, as if their standing in the world is more important than the worth of souls and their standing with God.
Along these same lines, we felt the overriding theme of the Values Voter Summit conference this year was that there is a very real threat to religious freedom in the United States of America, a threat that has become increasingly evident as the current administration has unconstitutionally pushed forward anti-America agendas. In no uncertain terms, speakers denounced the monstrosity known as Obamacare, which, among other things, requires insurance companies—even those run by religious organizations—to provide contraceptives and abortifacient drugs for free despite religious proscriptions. In no uncertain terms, speakers denounced the forcing of “same-sex marriage” on the American public and the president breaking his presidential oath by unilaterally deciding not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. In no uncertain terms, speakers exposed the White House’s intention to take over the internet so as to curtail our first freedoms. In no uncertain terms, speakers exposed Obama’s kowtowing to America’s enemies while disrespecting our ally Israel. Right here in America, Judeo-Christian ideals and freedoms are truly under attack on many fronts, being replaced by all that is pro-secular, pro-sexual immorality, and inexplicably pro-Muslim and anti-
In no uncertain terms the conviction was expressed by speaker after speaker that America’s economic welfare is dependent on reviving and preserving our nation’s belief in, obedience to, and reliance on God.
What can we do? VOTE! And instill in everyone you know the importance of registering and voting.
The excellent speeches from this conference are available for viewing on the Values Voter Summit website. Our next emails will contain highlights from many of these speeches and break-out sessions. For those of you who have never attended this family, freedom, and faith-based conference, we think you will find the views expressed to be refreshingly brave and right-headed. In no uncertain terms, here is inspiration we all need.
--Stephen & Janice Graham
September 13, 2012
SoL is attending the Values Voter Summit in Washington DC September 14-16. It is sponsored by the Family Research Council. This is the 7th annual meeting of religious conservatives. It is a great time to hear messages of faith and conservativism. We will be posing on our SoL Blog with reports on the Summit. Check out the Values Voter Summit website here.
Here are the Speakers for the VVS:
Tony Perkins, President, FRC Action and Family Research Council (FRC)*
Dr. Michael Oren, Ambassador of Israel to the United States
Sandy Rios, Host, Sandy Rios in the Morning, AFR Talk and Fox News Contributor
Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.)*
Kirk Cameron, Television Film Actor and Producer, Monumental
Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)*
Pro-Family Champions in the House
- Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.)*
- Representative Tim Huelskamp (R-Kans.)*
- Representative James Lankford (R-Okla.)*
- Tom McClusky, Moderator, Senior Vice President, FRC Action*
Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)*
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.)*
Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)*
Tim Wildmon, President, AFA Action*
Governor Bob McDonnell (R-Va.)*
Saving the American Dream Panel
- Connie Mackey, President, FRC Action PAC*
- Genevieve Wood, Vice President of Marketing, The Heritage Foundation*
Representative Steve King (R-Iowa)*
Gary Bauer, President, American Values*
Ted Cruz, Candidate for U.S. Senate, Texas; Former Solicitor General of Texas*
Representative Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)*
Representative Allen West (R-Fla.)*
Lt. Col. Oliver North (ret.)*
Steven Crowder, Fox News Contributor, Comedian, Actor, Writer*
Dennis Prager, Host, The Dennis Prager Show*
Governor Mike Huckabee, Former Governor of Arkansas and Host, The Mike Huckabee Show Edwin Meese III, Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow in Public Policy, Chairman of the Center for Legal Studies and Judicial Studies, Former U.S. Attorney General;
Jennifer Marshall, Director, Domestic Policy Studies;
Nina Owcharenko, Director, Health Policy Studies)
Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman, Liberty Counsel and Dean, School of Law, Liberty University*
Dr. Bill Bennett, Host, Morning in America*
Star Parker, Founder, Center for Urban Renewal and Education*
The States of Our Union
- Joseph Backholm, Executive Director, Preserve Marriage Washington*
- Carroll Conley, Executive Director, Maine Family Policy Council*
- John Helmberger, CEO, Minnesota Family Council*
- Cathi Herrod, President, Center for Arizona Policy*
- Derek McCoy, Executive Director, Maryland Marriage Alliance*
Governor Jan Brewer (R-Ariz.)*
Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General, Virginia*
Senator Rick Santorum, Former U.S. Senator (R-Pa.) and 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate*
Gary Bauer, President, American Values
Lila Rose, President, Live Action*
Religious Liberty Panel
- Lt. Gen. (ret.) William Boykin, Former Commander, Delta Force*
- Mike Johnson, Esq., Liberty Institute*
- Todd Starnes, FOX News
Glenn Beck, Host, The Glenn Beck Show
Becky Norton Dunlop, Vice President, External Relations, The Heritage Foundation*
Dr. Michael Farris, Chancellor, Patrick Henry College*
Dr. Ronald Godwin, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, Provost, Liberty University*
Lila Rose, President, Live Action*
(* indicates invited and confirmed. Others are invted, confirmation pending.)
Here are the breakout sessions for the VVS:
ECONOMIC INEQUALITY: RECONCILING CAPITALISM AND COMPASSION
Speakers: Dr. Matt Spalding, Vice President, American Studies and Director, B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics, The Heritage Foundation (confirmed); Bob Woodson, Founder and President, Center for Neighborhood Enterprise (confirmed); Rea Hederman, Assistant Director, Center for Data Analysis and Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation (confirmed)
Synopsis: President Obama has made income inequality and so-called "fairness" the defining issue of the 2012 election. How should conservatives think about these and related economic questions in light of our Founding principles? The Heritage Foundation's Matthew Spalding leads a discussion with his colleague Rea Hederman and Bob Woodson of the Center for Neighborhood Enterprise on the benefits of free markets, why inequality is not the problem the Left says it is, and how to really help the poor.
ISRAEL, IRAN AND THE FUTURE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION
Speakers: Lt. Gen. (ret.) William G. Boykin, Former Commander, Delta Force (confirmed); Kamal Saleem, Founder, Koome Ministries; Author; Former Terrorist; Mathew Staver; Founder and Chairman, Liberty Counsel and Dean and Professor of Law, Liberty University School of Law (confirmed)
Synopsis: The tiny nation Israel is surrounded by large Arab states that are hostile to Israel's existence. Iran is on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon, and, if successful, will target Israel for annihilation. Israel is America?'s greatest ally in the Middle East. But U.S. policies towards Israel have not always supported Israel. The battle line for the survival of Western Civilization runs through Israel. America must provide its full and unreserved support for Israel. This breakout will discuss the strategic nature of Israel, and its role in the Middle East, America, and in the future of Western Civilization.
SPEECHLESS?--SILENCING THE CHRISTIANS
Speaker: Ed Vitagliano, Director of Research, American Family Association
Synopsis: Americans are at a greater risk of losing their basic freedoms today than ever before in the history of this nation. Political correctness and the voice of the liberal minority are undermining the morals and values of main-stream America. Christians are being silenced across America: in the political debate, the public square, the schools, the workplace, and even in the sanctuary of their own churches. Using examples from the video series, "Speechless, Silencing the Christians," Ed Vitagliano takes you on a journey across the country to meet citizens who have been arrested for speaking at a public rally, students who are being forced to attend classes that require them to recite verses from the Koran and to stage their own Jihad and activists pushing social tolerance to such an extreme that the Bible itself is being labeled "hate speech."
UNDERSTANDING RADICAL ISLAM 101
Speaker: Nonie Darwish, Founder, Arabs for Israel, Founder, Former Muslims United, Author, Cruel and Usual Punishment (confirmed); Frank Gaffney, President, Center for Security Policy; Kristi Hamrick (Moderator), Media Consultant; Erick Stakelbeck, Middle East Expert and Reporter, Christian Broadcasting Network
Synopsis: Since 9-11, blaming the victim has been a popular media and left-wing pursuit. Somehow, argue America-haters, we brought the violence upon ourselves. But when the blood of thousands of Americans spilt that day joined other victims of terrorist acts from around the world it became paramount to understand the radical mindset and worldview affecting us all. Political correctness is no protection against terrorist acts. Gary Bauer's American Values presents "Radical Islam 101" to provide a framework for understanding the worldview behind the violence.
ONE LIFE: 40 YEARS OF ROE V. WADE, ENDING ABORTION TODAY
Speakers:David Bereit (confirmed), National Director, 40 Days for Life; Ryan Bomberger, Founder, The Radiance Foundation (confirmed); Jeanne Monahan, Moderator, Director for the Center for Human Dignity, Family Research Council (confirmed); Dr. Michael New (confirmed), Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Michigan; Melissa Ohden (confirmed), a saline abortion survivor
Synopsis: Looking back: 55 million isn't a statistic, It's your neighbor, Your teacher, Your classmate, Your colleague, Your friend, Your niece, Your sibling, Your child: Its one life and one life matters. Looking forward: Over 55 million lives have been lost ?" what will you do to save just one? Volunteer? March? Pray? Counsel? Protest? Pray? Its one life and every life matters. The 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade leaves over 55 million dead in its wake and even more injured.
Speakers:David Christensen (Moderator), Senior Director for Congressional Affairs, Family Research Council (confirmed); Dean Clancy, Vice President, Health Care Policy, FreedomWorks (confirmed); Martin Gold, Partner, Covington & Burling (confirmed); Russ Vought, Political Director, Heritage Action for America (confirmed)
Synopsis: Call it a mandate, a tax, a penalty, constitutional or unconstitutional the one word that best describes it is OPPRESSIVE. States' rights, religious liberty, life, economic freedom are all sacrificed if Obamacare is allowed to go forward. Full repeal is the ONLY answer. Learn how it can be done and what you can do.
CAN YOU PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN FROM THE COMMERCIAL SEX INDUSTRY?
Speaker: Former Congresswoman Linda Smith along with a Survivor of Sex Trafficking
Synopsis: Former Congresswoman Linda Smith, founder of Shared Hope International, will expose the facts regarding the frightening explosion of child sex trafficking in the U.S. and reasons our federal laws alone cannot address the problem. She will share details about the success of Shared Hope's groundbreaking 2011 initiative that assessed the laws of all 50 states and the District of Columbia having an impact on the issue of the commercial sexual abuse of our children. The report of findings and accompanying recommendations--the Protected Innocence Challenge--seeks to assist state legislators to establish minimum standards of law that serve to protect children from sex trafficking, bring victims access to justice, and impose meaningful penalties on the perpetrators of this horrible crime. In the first four months after releasing the Protected Innocence Challenge, 35 states introduced legislation based on its recommendations. Along with Linda, a survivor of sex trafficking will share her story and illustrate how better laws could have protected her.
PREPARING FOR THE COMING ECONOMIC EARTHQUAKE
Speaker: Art Ally, Founder and President of the Timothy Plan Mutual Fund Family
Synopsis: We all need to come to grips with the fact that America stands at the precipice of moral, economic and ultimately spiritual collapse. The question is no longer 'if' but rather 'when.' The bigger question then becomes, "What can you do to prepare for it and minimize the impact it will have on you and your loved ones?" We do not pretend to have all the answers but, if we gain a proper perspective as to where our nation stands economically, we will be better equipped to make better personal and family decisions.
Speakers: Robert Arnakis, Senior Director of Domestic and International Programs, Leadership Institute (confirmed); Gary Marx, Executive Director, Faith and Freedom Coalition (confirmed)
Synopsis: Learn how to win in 2012. Come learn how. The GOTV Workshop will teach you how to maximize each voter contact. You will develop a complete GOTV plan using the internet, mail, phones, door to door, and Election Day strategies. You will walk away knowing what resources you must have, what is available for early and absentee voters, and how to turn out your voters to the polls.
VERTICAL VOTE CAMPAIGN FOR LIFE, MARRIAGE AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTIES
Speaker: Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., Founder, International Communion of Evangelical Churches and Senior Pastor, Hope Christian Church, Beltsville, MD (confirmed)
Synopsis: The institution of marriage is under a barrage of attacks from certain politicians, judicial activists, and citizen advocates. Recent events including the President of the United States commenting that he supports gay marriage, instructing the Department of Justice not to enforce violations of the Defense of Marriage Act and a 9th circuit court's decision to strike down Proposition 8 in California, makes it necessary for us to act now! The above combined actions make it abundantly clear that an effective campaign to counter the political, legal, and citizen advocacy activities to reshape and redefine marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman is needed. It is our intent to mount an effective multi-denominational, multi-racial coalition's operation to defend the institution of marriage.
MILLENNIALS AND THE FUTURE OF POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT
Speakers: Student Leaders; Matthew Lee Anderson, Blogger, MereOrthodoxy.com and author, Earthen Vessels; Owen Strachan, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Christian Theology and Church History, Boyce College, Louisville, KY; Eric Teetsel, Director, Manhattan Declaration; Andrew Walker, Policy Analyst at the Family Foundation; Chris Marlink (moderator), Social Media Manager, Family Research Council
Synopsis: Influential voices in the media and church are charging that Christians have become too politicized, and that younger Christians are leaving the church because of it. To hear the media tell it, younger believers are becoming more liberal and disengaging from the political process. But is it true? Join a panel of leading conservative millennials as they engage in a discussion with students leaders on the future of political engagement and the issues of life, marriage, religious liberty, and economics.
DEBUNKING THE MYTH OF SEPARATION....WHY PASTORS MUST ENGAGE IN POLITICS
Speakers:Dr. Rick Scarborough, Founder, Vision America
Synopsis: This breakout session will be led by Dr. Rick Scarborough, who will be joined by other Pastors who understand that our founders never intended for Pastors and Churches to be disengaged from discussing politics and politicians, from a Biblical perspective. They will conduct a panel discussion of how they have witnessed their congregations make a difference in the moral and civil arena and they will share why God expects all Biblical Pastors to do the same. Attendees will be allowed to ask questions during the panel discussion.
The Standard of LibertyVoice
August 20, 2012
Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Proves Harmful
In Massachusetts, in 2003, same-sex marriage became legal (unconstitutionally, by judicial decree). We were told it was all about individual equality and the right to love whomever one wishes. We were told it couldn’t do any harm. Well, now we know none of that was true. According to what has occurred in Massachusetts since 2003, legalizing same-sex marriage turns out to be a powerful means to push homosexualism and punish those with traditional values in every aspect of society.
In “What same-sex ‘marriage’ has done to Massachusetts,” Brian Camenker lists widespread effects of the legalization of same-sex marriage by listing specific negative incidents concerning public schools, public health, hospitals, domestic violence programs, business and employment, the legal profession and judicial system, adoption and birth certificates, government mandates, the public square, churches being harassed, the media, politics, and the rule of law.
Here is just a sampling of these effects. An 8th grade teacher brags that she explicitly discusses gay sex in class because “it’s legal now.” School classrooms and libraries use pro-gay literature. Many more children are self-identifying as “gay.” The STD test required to obtain a marriage license was soon eliminated. When a doctor objected to his hospitals’ involvement in gay pride activities his job was threatened and he was required to apologize and keep his mouth shut. People can now get fired from their jobs by expressing religious objections to same-sex marriage. Gay activists have interrupted religious gatherings with screams and taunting while police do nothing. The Mass. bar exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex marriage law. The Boston media regularly features homosexual married couples in general news stories where heterosexual couples used to be used. The cost of dealing with domestic violence has gone up exponentially given the extremely disfunctional nature of homosexual relationships. Every Mass. state elected official now publically supports gay marriage.
Many more incidents showing how same-sex marriage “is really about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and forcing its acceptance on (otherwise unwilling) citizens and our social, political, and commercial institutions,” are described in Cameker’s excellent article. Click here to read the article.
The War on God is No Joke
We have a joke line in our family that comes from an old Saturday Night Live sketch. It’s December 7, 1941 and a town newspaper is lackadaisically deciding on its top front page story. One suggestion is to feature the ladies volleyball team making the state finals. Another idea is the theft of some typewriters at the high school. Still another front page suggestion is to warn readers of the remote possibility of bad weather. This inanity goes on until an extremely distraught reporter played by Phil Hartman blurts out in desperation, “It’s Raining Bombs in Hawaii! — There’s your headline!” The front page ends up with Hartman’s photo and the headline “Local Reporter Shoots Self,” while in a back page a tiny blurb is titled, “Asians Attack ‘Base.’”
This is often how we feel at Standard of Liberty. There’s a war raging that seems to be going on largely unnoticed. It’s between two diametrically opposed world views. For want of a better term, it’s between the traditional values side and the anti-traditional values side. Since basic moral values come from God, what we have is the God side versus the anti-God side. If we care about freedom, our children and grandchildren, education, government, decency, order, health, truth, and the future of God’s children, we simply cannot “get along” with those who are actively and militantly pushing to replace God’s standard for goodness with some arbitrary, debased lifestyle.
When we went to our local Chick-Fil-A on August 8, we were surprised and gratified. Apparently all over the country, in a very big way, the silent majority was making its voice heard in support of the owner of the fast food chain who was verbally attacked and his business boycotted by gay activist groups because he expressed his belief in traditional marriage in an interview with a Baptist periodical. Preposterous, we know, but true. We witnessed a continual flow of families – from those with several small children to elderly couples – cheerfully standing in lines that circled the building or waiting patiently for drive-through service in the serpentine chain of cars. “Why are you here?” we asked customers, and the answer was always “to support the standard family.” Interesting that they expressed it was the family they were there in support of, not merely free speech.
They have it right. The bigger question is not about respectfully allowing everybody equal freedom to express their opinions, although that would be nice. We’re way past that. Just as our Founders indicated, our system of government was designed only for a moral people. If we take a good hard look at our mainstream culture today, we are no longer a moral people. Sad to say, not only are right opinions being attacked, but false, disgusting, and dangerous opinions are being allowed, respected, and encouraged. And as we know, ideas have consequences.
Just a few weeks after the amazing turnout at Chick-Fil-A an armed man with 50 extra rounds of ammo, and for unknown reasons a backpack of Chick-Fil-A sandwiches, entered the Family Research Council, a religious, traditional values lobbying organization in Washington D. C. He said he didn’t like their policies and fired his gun in the lobby at the unarmed, ununiformed building manager who, though shot in the arm, heroically and harmlessly subdued the shooter. As the shooter was currently a volunteer at a LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) center, it would be ridiculous to pretend that what the FBI is calling an act of domestic terrorism was not fueled by highly organized and funded groups which repeatedly rate businesses according to their degree of pro-gayness and target God-centered groups by calling them “hate groups.”
Incredibly, unlike any speech or event that can be spun as hate against gays, the shooting incident at FRC obviously fueled by gay activism hardly made mainstream news. Like Phil Hartman, we want to shout, There’s a war on against God! — There’s your headline.
Note: SoL has attended FRC’s excellent Values Voter Summit in D. C. each year since it began in 2006. We send them our prayers and best wishes.
--Stephen and Janice Graham
Virtue Brings Light; Indulgence Brings Fog
"The fog creeps in on little cat feet," begins Robert Louis Stephenson’s famous little poem. Fog is an interesting phenomenon. It creeps in silently and covers everything. In fog there is no black and white, all is gray. It makes it difficult to see clearly, to differentiate, to discern. This is how the devil works. He progressively grays the distinctions between right and wrong.
We now live in a sexually permissive culture in which God’s bright, clear rules have melted into fog as thick as pea soup. As a result, a great many young people’s sexual development has been interfered with; secret excesses and perversions such as pornography addiction, promiscuity, and homosexual experimentation are epidemic.
C. S. Lewis wrote about fog, too, as it pertains to chastity. “Virtue, even attempted virtue—brings light; indulgence brings fog.”As followers of Christ, complete chastity (holiness, excellence, purity inside and out) is the standard, the goal. If people fall short of this standard, and they often do, the rules are still in place and we know we should repent, relying on Christ, and strive on according to those rules to get back in the light. Like the hymn says, “Let us remember and be sure our hearts and hands are clean and pure.”
Is this difficult? Yes, especially today. C. S. Lewis (even 60 years ago) said there are three reasons “why it is now specially difficult for us to desire—let alone achieve—complete chastity.”
“In the first place our warped natures, the devils who tempt us, and all the contemporary propaganda for lust, combine to make us feel that the desires we are resisting are so ‘natural’, so ‘healthy’, and so reasonable, that it is almost perverse and abnormal to resist them. . . . Now this, on any conceivable view, and quite apart from Christianity, must be nonsense. . . . Every sane and civilised man must have some set of principles by which he chooses to reject some of his desires and to permit others . . . unless you are going to ruin your whole life.”
“In the second place, many people are deterred from seriously attempting Christian chastity because they think (before trying [and we add: even after what they consider enough trying]) that it is impossible. But when a thing has to be attempted, one must never think about possibility or impossibility. . . [P]eople quite often do what seemed impossible before they did it. It is wonderful what you can do when you have to.”
“We may, indeed, be sure that perfect chastity—like perfect charity—will not be attained by any merely human efforts. You must ask for God’s help. Even when you have done so, it may seem to you for a long time that no help, or less help than you need, is being given. Never mind. After each failure, ask forgiveness, pick yourself up, and try again. Very often what God first helps us toward is not the virtue itself but just this power of always trying again. For however important chastity ( . . . or any other virtue) may be, this process trains us in habits of the soul which are more important still. It cures our illusions about ourselves and teaches us to depend on God. We learn, on the one hand, that we cannot trust ourselves even in our best moments, and on the other, that we need not despair in our worst, for our failures are forgiven. The only fatal thing is to sit down content with anything less than perfection.”
Lewis’s third reason for the difficulty of being totally chaste is that we mistakenly refer to chastity as some dangerous sort of “‘repressed’ sex.” He expertly explains this away and puts the responsibility right where it should be. “[T]hose who are seriously attempting chastity are more conscious, and soon know a great deal more about their own sexuality than anyone else. They come to know their desires as Wellington knew Napoleon, or as Sherlock Holmes knew Moriarty; as a rat catcher knows rats or a plumber knows about leaky pipes.”
There exist organizations, supposedly in the LDS mainstream though not official, which are doing families and individuals a great disservice. But you make the call. If their goal is not excellence, holiness, or purity, but merely to “diminish” wayward desires (expressed in their mission statement) aren’t they doing Lewis’s fatal thing: sitting down content with something less than perfection? The word diminish is especially troublesome. What does that mean and who decides how much “diminishing” is enough? We pray that such groups will abandon foggy, irreligious goals that indulge wayward individuals and make concessions toward political correctness. Indulgence and concessions can lead only to spiritual darkness and risky physical behaviors. To have integrity we must take a clear orthodox stand by offering the light of truth to souls lost in today’s murky sexuality soup.
--Stephen and Janice Graham
August 15, 2012
Thanks to great volunteers, Standard of Liberty now has accounts on Facebook and Twitter. Follow us on these social media as well as visiting our website and blog.
Quote of the day:
"Kids are naturally curious, and if they're exposed to a range of ideas, something will pull them in." (We apply this to how attitudes about sexuality are learned and how the homosexual propaganda ranging our culture is recruiting kids, but this is a quote from The Costco Connection from an article by Georgia Orcutt quoting cookbook author Sally Sampson about teaching kids to eat healthful foods by inspiring them to cook! Truth is everywhere if you care to see it!)
Chick-Fil-A is Anything but Chicken-Hearted
We lend our support to the excellent fast food chain's founders and owners who are standing firm in their right to express their deeply-held convictions according to the dictates of their conscience and financially support others who share those convictions.
It's crucial to note that the controversy surrounding this particular news story indicates a new development in gay activism. It is that gay activist organizations' tactics have become even more emboldened as to evolve from attacking what they call discriminatory policies and actions to attacking anything they perceive as anti-gay speech, thought, or support. We now see gay activists as the thought and speech police they intend to be. The mere expression of support for traditional morality is being narcissistically twisted and attacked as hateful discrimination against homosexuals.
The truth is, religious traditional moralists could now say the same thing, that homosexualists are full of hateful discrimination against them. The anti-traditional sexual morality rhetoric toward Chick-Fil-A has certainly been hateful and intolerant. You might call these detractors Christphobes, straight-bashers, or anti-traditional-marriage bigots. Even some gay proponents are saying this is going too far, that in America people should be able to think, share, and encourage what they believe without being harassed or threatened. Yes, but what an understatement! It's an unalienable right, protected by the Constitution!
But sadly, many unthinking individuals and groups are being taken in by the hyped gay victim mentality which is painting Chick-Fil-A as the bully, when it's actually the other way around. By the way, we at SoL have been the recipients of an email sent to us by Wayne Besen, a prominent gay activist who recently appeared on the O'Reilly Factor at Fox News browbeating Chick-Fil-A. This email, from a perfect stranger to us, is the most vile personal attack we have ever received, so sick and blasphemous we cannot repeat it. Everyone should now know who is really bullying whom.
A grateful thank you to the Truett Cathy family, for taking a stand for our precious First Amendment freedoms. Obviously, in this secular, gay-affirming culture, those who believe in traditional values will lose these freedoms unless more of us begin exercising them.
Eat at Chick-Fil-A today, August 1, 2012, designated as Chick-Fil-A Day by Mike Huckabee and others, or better yet, go there and enjoy their good food and service often. It's reported that this controversy has been great for business! There are more of us than there are of them, if we'll only speak up!
When Daddy Doesn't Love Mommy--
the effects of "mixed-orientation marriage" on children August 1, 2012
We have had a lot of feedback on our articles about the LDS open "mixed-orientation marriage" development. What we haven't discussed is the effect this would have on the children involved.
As we see the much-praised and publicized trend for openly same-sex attracted guys to get straight girls to marry them in the temple so they can progress toward their ostensible goals in the Church, we also see that couples involved in this experimental phenomenon are bringing children into their homes, however that is achieved. How will this affect these children? Do the parents teach their children that their daddy doesn't love their mommy the way married people should, that he wishes he could go to bed with another man instead?
Children growing up in a home where it is openly accepted and publicly known that the father is permanently SSA, homosexual, or gay, that is, romantically attracted not to the mother, his wife, but to another man or men, would seem to be growing up in a very insecure and dangerous environment. Proper attitudes toward sexuality are not being modeled. Instead, the child is being taught all kinds of harmful, false, and confusing ideas: that love and sex need not be connected, that fathers need not be affectionate toward mothers, that husbands and wives need not love each other the way married people do, that extra-marital lust is harmless, that it's okay for men to be turned on by other men, and the list goes on. Will the child have fears that Daddy will abandon the family if he falls in love with a man?
It seems that the openly homosexual father will undoubtedly model what are now thought of as gay stereotypes or exemplify homosexuality in one way or another (even if not actually acting out with other men), or why would he be openly SSA? He may be a spokesman, writer, therapist, facilitator, or belong to activist groups. The vulnerable child will naturally seek to emulate his father in every way. The duped mother may also endorse the homosexual identity and encourage the child to admire and copy the father. The child will then grow up believing that being SSA is okay, and that same-sex sexual attraction is a perfectly fine channel for his or her developing sexuality to take.
Of course the above is what the children would be learning in such a home. How can a mixed-orientation couple, married in the temple with the approbation of Church, family, and friends, teach their child anything else? Given their public declaration of support for SSA and mixed-orientation marriage, these parents aren't going to be teaching their own child that their own mixed-orientation marriage is in any way abnormal or below standard. Of course they will teach their children, even in unspoken ways, that they are a normal couple, or as these couples have articulated, even superior to traditional heterosexually oriented couples. Hence, the child will grow up thinking homosexuality and mixed orientation marriage are actually better than heterosexual coupling. Is this true or right or fair?
The other day we watched a good movie called There Be Dragons. A quote: "In a child's heart many seeds are planted. You never know quite what will grow." Before we allow for, encourage, support, or embrace mixed-orientation marriage, we need to consider what it will be teaching the children in that home.
There is a movement now within the LDS Church to push the notion that SSA (same-sex sexual attraction) is a virtuous and noble identity that can be legitimately claimed by faithful members of the Church, that is, as long as it isn’t acted on. Is there anything wrong with this thinking? Yes, lots. For one thing, when we say claiming an unalterable SSA identity is perfectly fine but must never be acted on, it is like saying ballet dancers are praiseworthy but actual ballet dancing is evil, which is crazy-making nonsense. Logically, something cannot be virtuous in theory but wicked in practice.
The scriptures are a great help here. We learn in Moroni 7 that it matters what things entice us. That which is of God always invites and entices us to do good, to love God, and to serve Him. On the other hand, whatsoever thing persuades us toward doing evil is most definitely of the devil. In other words, if a behavior is not of God, then anything that entices one toward that behavior is not of God.
SSA, or same-sex sexual attraction, is not just a neutral label as some may unthinkingly conclude. SSA is about self-maintained sexual feelings and thoughts which entice a person to act in certain ways. As uncomfortable as it may be, we must confront what SSA invites and persuades one to do and to assess whether that behavior is of God.
What behaviors does SSA entice people to do? Honest people cannot deny that same-sex sexual attractions entice a person to perform sexually stimulating acts with persons of the same sex, acts that perversely imitate male-female mating, abuse one’s body, and mock the sacred power of procreation.
We all know from the scriptures and countless propheticpronouncements that God unequivocally condemns such unnatural acts both from a moral and a spiritual standpoint. Not only that, we know such behavior inordinately spreads deadly diseases, causes specific cancers and chronic health disorders, and is associated with drug abuse, domestic violence, and child abuse in percentages off the charts. For one or more of these reasons, there doesn’t seem to be any doubt among most LDS Church members that homosexual behavior is wrong and therefore not of God.
Here we must point out that how these attractions come to be is a moot point in a discussion about right and wrong. The causes of homosexuality and the morality of it are two separate issues. Even if it were possible that an accountable person could not help doing something wrong, the act itself would still be wrong.
How wrong are these attractions? How destructive? How damaging to the soul? It’s important to note that same-sex sexual attractions, meaning those temptations which entice to do that which is not of God, are somewhat different from other types of temptations. Say you are tempted to drink alcoholic drinks, which is prohibited by LDS Church standards. You don’t get the actual feelings alcohol gives you just by looking at or talking about alcohol; you have to actually drink it. But sex is a very different story. With sex, you can get pleasure (arousal) out of just the enticement itself, as in fantasizing. That’s why things like written and visual pornography, internet chat rooms, phone sex, and sexting are so prevalent.
The infamous Planned Parenthood exploits this fact. It teaches: “Sexual pleasure is the feeling we get when we’re sexually aroused . . . Sexual fantasy is an important part of sexual pleasure.” Obviously out-of-bounds sexual lusts need not be acted upon body-to-body in order to give physical gratification, that is, sinful pleasure. What’s wrong with SSA? Not only does it entice to do evil, it is evil of itself. And like all evil, it can and should be rooted out and repented of.
The naming and dignifying of SSA in Mormon culture is more than a nod to the world’s current love affair with a very ancient vice. Giving place for this self-proclaimed identity within the Church only encourages sin. If we care about the welfare of souls we should uphold the gospel of Jesus Christ as it concerns the soul (sin, repentance, divine redemption) as it applies to all of us, those with SSA included. We are selling our own souls and losing the precious souls of young people all over the Church by advocating for and accommodating so-called SSA rather than bravely facing what it really is and compassionately offering hope and help for preventing, rooting out, and overcoming this sin, as all others, through knowledge of good and evil and the Atonement of Christ.
Philosophical Approaches to Liberty
and the Same-sex Marriage Debate
By Paul Mero, President, Sutherland Institute
Read this Salt Lake Tribune article here.
John Stuart Mill and Lord John Acton were contemporaries in 19th century British politics. Both men served in Parliament. Both men tended to vote similarly. But each man represented very different theories of liberty. Mill, ever the utilitarian, believed that liberty is the right to do what one desires, with certain restrictions. Acton, ever the conservative, believed that liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought.
Nearly all modern arguments about personal liberty and rights reach back in time to embrace the views of Mill or Acton and their respective historical predecessors. When we hear libertarians (joined by many modern liberals) and conservatives debate today, both camps are posing theories of liberty developed in bygone eras.
Utah political culture is so divided as well. Freedom-loving people of all stripes invoke one or the other theories of liberty. Many of the current contentions between the Utah Republican Party and the Utah tea party are a result of mingling these theories. On some issues, such as economics, they lean heavily toward Mill. On other issues, such as morality, they lean heavily toward Acton. Contentions arise when activists apply these theories arbitrarily and interchangeably.
But where we are seeing these two camps increasingly come into conflict is over the issue of homosexuality. On the one hand, most Utahns understand and accept the need for individuals to "work out their own salvation" including the struggles and trials of personal human identity and the purpose of sexual behavior. We remain kind and tolerant to a very patient degree because most of us see these struggles and decisions no differently than any other with which all mortals are faced. There but for the grace of God, go I.
On the other hand, most reasonable Utahns also understand and accept that our personal decisions and struggles alone — the "right" to do whatever we desire — aren't always proper justification for public debate or rise to the level of rights. During a debate at the University of Utah several years ago on the subject of "gay rights," I expressed the point this way, "We know how you personally benefit from gaining all of the privileges you seek. What we want to know is how society benefits?" In other words, selfishness isn't a right in a free society, though it is how we often behave personally.
Clearly Utahns, by and large, have a difficult time coping with these important distinctions. We know we do because Utah culture is so extremely passive-aggressive. Compound that passive-aggressiveness with anecdotal stories of "injustices" and "indignities" experienced by struggling souls, especially anecdotes about children and youths, and pretty soon a political movement begins to seriously take shape even in Utah. So much so these days that even seriously conservative families begin to believe in the Mill theory of liberty when they are inherently and have been traditionally firmly in the Acton camp.
In these dysfunctional circumstances, facts matter little. What matters to severely passive aggressive people are the stories. The only influence that seems to matter for some Utahns is that a grieving parent in tears testifies that they know their child was "born gay." The fact that there is no replicable scientific or medical evidence that proves that point is irrelevant in the mind of that grieving parent. The fact that that testimony, if from an otherwise conservative Utahn, contradicts ideals of moral agency or religious teaching, is of little influence. As Mill and his predecessors and followers believe reason is the slave to passion and, in politics today, emotions seem to trump reason.
The American founders were students of liberty. They saw firsthand what France was experiencing simultaneously. France chose a different kind of liberty, the liberty eventually expressed by Mill. America's founders chose an integrated liberty — knowing order must precede liberty — eventually best expressed by Lord Acton that rights are inherited not organic. How Utahns will lean, especially over this issue of "gay rights," remains to be seen.
An open letter to homosexuals
by Matt Barber
Read this World Net Daily article here.
I write this not to professional homosexuals. That is to say, not to members of the well-funded, politically powerful homosexual activist lobby. They will mock and reject my words outright. They will twist and misrepresent what I say to further their own socio-political agenda. That’s fine. It’s to be expected. It merits little more than a yawn and an eye roll.
Instead, I write this to my fellow travelers in life – average, ordinary people, male and female, young and old – who happen to call themselves “gay.” I write this out of obedience to God.
It is my hope and prayer that you will consider what I have to say and take it at face value. My intentions are pure and my motives upright. If I can plant the seed of truth in just one person, and that seed begins to sprout, then I consider this letter a success.
I pray that you are that person.
What I write may offend you. It may even infuriate you. But I hope it makes you think. Know this: Your friends have lied to you. Christians do not hate you. We love you intensely. We love you because of who you are, not because of what you do or because of who you think you are.
Still, to love someone and to lie to them is to hate them – especially when that lie inevitably leads to a tragic and hopeless end.
If you have a loved one, blindfolded and running full speed toward cliff’s edge, do you not yell, stop! Would you not run after them, even tackling them if need be to prevent them from plummeting to certain death? What would we think of the person who said: “Keep running; all is well.”
All is not well, and you know it. On this path, “it” decidedly does not “get better.” It only gets worse. You will fall and you will die – perhaps not physical death, straight away – but certainly, an emotional and spiritual death. Homosexual activists, “progressives,” Hollywood, the media, academia and popular culture are telling you to keep running.
I’m yelling, stop!
Your lifestyle – homosexuality – is always and forever, objectively and demonstrably wrong. It is never good, natural, right or praiseworthy. If you have “gay pride,” you have “sin pride.” Although homosexuality is not the only sexual sin, it is, indeed, sin. Scripture is unequivocal on this fact throughout both the Old and New Testaments.
But this reality is manifest beyond the pages of Scripture. Unnatural behaviors beget natural consequences. So-called “homophobia” is not responsible for the fact that, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one-in-five “gay” men and adolescents in major cities across America have been infected – through bad behavior – with HIV/AIDS.
Sin is responsible.
In almost every category – disease, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, and suicide – those who call themselves “gay” live and die with consequences that have nothing gay, in the true sense of the word, about them.
Is this you? Be honest.
At least be honest with yourself.
Scripture admonishes: “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). This does not simply mean physical death, but something far worse: spiritual death.
I know from which I speak. I am no better than you. I, too, once lived a lifestyle of sexual sin. Not homosexual sin, but sexual sin nonetheless. As a young man I did not treat God’s daughters as He intended and, instead, engaged in a lifestyle of selfish womanizing and fornication.
The wages of sin in my life was death – spiritual and emotional death. I was on your same path.
But by His grace, I was offered and accepted “the free gift of God.” I, instead, was saved and given “eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Do I still struggle with sin? Of course. Every day. We all do. We are fallen. We are sinners.
Still, Christ’s gift to me was forgiveness, redemption and life everlasting. My friend, that gift is available to you as well.
Snatch it up. Please.
During the Awakening 2011 – a national conference held, that year, at Liberty University – I was visiting with a young woman from the hard-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). I liked her. I loved her, in fact, in the way her heavenly Father, Christ Jesus, loves her and has enabled me to love her. I think of her and pray for her often.
In recent years, the SPLC has taken to smearing Christian organizations that defend the biblical sexual ethic as “hate groups.” After visiting for a while, I asked this young woman if she really believed that we Christians hate homosexuals. To my surprise she admitted that we do not. “But the things you say are sometimes hateful,” she added.
Indeed, truth is hate to those who hate truth.
The truth is that you have immeasurable value. You are a beautiful, unique, priceless human being. The very Creator of the universe, in the person of Jesus Christ, took such an interest in you that He meticulously wove you together in your mother’s womb. He loves you with a love that no human can fully grasp. Still, this is true not because of your so-called “sexual orientation,” but, rather, in spite of it.
You are valuable and worthy of love because God created you in His image. If you define your identity based upon sexual temptations and behaviors your Creator has called sin – an “abomination” – then you are not fulfilling the purpose for which He created you. In so doing, you have become the sum total of your sins. You are in rebellion against God and you know it.
He made you to know it.
Yes, the activists tell you to take “pride” in your “sexual orientation,” but you don’t feel pride. You feel ashamed, and so you try, in vain, to numb the shame with more of the very behavior that causes it. You will never fill the void you feel with drugs, alcohol or more sexual acting-out. These things only expand your emptiness.
Christ alone can fill the void.
And He will.
The Burning Question: What Do Mormon Homosexualists Want?
June 13, 2012
Before reading this please note the great distinction we make between those who believe people should privately strive to overcome homosexual tendencies, and those who have decided to publicly embrace and advocate for the SSA identity. By Mormon homosexualists we mean the latter.
Mormon homosexualists, SSA/gay or not, want something or they wouldn’t be going public. These are those who have swallowed the totally unproven notion that people are born gay and the totally irreligious and false notion that people can’t or shouldn’t try to school their sexual thoughts and feelings, and who are therefore caught up in the worldly pro-gay hype. We are seeing Mormon homosexualists marching in gay pride parades, being interviewed on radio and TV, writing books, appearing in newspaper and magazine articles, being invited to speak at LDS-related conferences, and blogging on the internet.
The latest twist in Mormon homosexulism is: Look at me, I’m same-sex attracted, I’m active LDS, I’m not acting out on my homosexuality, I’m even married to an opposite-sex person. I just want to advocate for Mormons with SSA. This may sound reasonable to many people. It may sound like a positive step. But once a person states his allegiance to homosexuality, everything else he says is not to be trusted. Such a stance is incongruent with LDS covenants to keep even one’s desires within God’s boundaries. It is incongruent with faithfulness in marriage, incongruent with respect for God’s gift of the power of procreation, and incongruent with protecting the innocence of, and modeling proper sexuality to, one’s children. This stance also obfuscates the definition of acting out and what same-sex lust really is. (See The Family: A Proclamation to the World.)
It’s a curious development. Seeing as how they appear to be following all the outward rules and seem to promise they always will, seeing as how they are getting married in the temple, procreating, and serving in the Church, what makes these Mormon homosexualists different from anybody else? The only difference is that they publicly identify themselves by and advocate their temptation. Do the rest of us become apologists for whatever particular temptations toward sin we happen to be experiencing? What would we hope to accomplish? Aren’t we all supposed to be turning to Christ, seeking to know what needs correcting in our souls, and overcoming this or that temptation continually? Obviously, this is not what these Mormon homosexualists have in mind. They certainly aren’t asking for help in overcoming their homosexual lusts. So, what are they hoping to accomplish? What is it they want?
1. These Mormon homosexualists may want to become popular within the Church. Perhaps they crave the same special acceptance and attention gays are now getting in the world. Society now increasingly accommodates and celebrates all things LGBT and a portion of the Mormon conmmunity seems to be following suit. Now it’s looking more and more like publishing your alternative sexuality—but not acting out (whatever that means)—is the way to have everything: stay in the Church mainstream, maintain your lusts, and even become popular. One such Mormon homosexualist is speaking at the annual LDS apologetics FAIR conference in August, advocating for same-sex sexual attraction. (We checked and there is to be no voice for reorientation therapy or LDS ex-gays at this conference as there has been in the past.)
2. These Mormon homosexualists may crave justification. Sexual lust is a mental exercise that is pleasurable and addictive. They know it’s wrong and may feel some degree of guilt but still want to hold on to the exciting thought patterns they have developed and the corresponding sexual feelings they produce. Another Mormon homosexualist in a “mixed-orientation marriage” came out recently on the internet and has attracted much attention. Among other things he blogs that if he walked into a room in which both men and women took off their clothes, he’d be turned on by the men rather than the women. Think about this bizarre scenario and his reaction; it is sick and wrong to instantly turn random human beings into pornography. And yet this blogger is getting all sorts of compassion, validation, and encouragement from effusive, unthinking Mormon readers who have now shown themselves to be a stripe of Mormon homosexualist as well.
3. These Mormon homosexualists may have a certain agenda, that is to normalize and elevate homosexuality as equal with heterosexuality within the Church as in the world. So far, activism for the “identity” within the Church has pretty much been accomplished despite President Packer’s recent warnings. In step with developments at BYU, we at SoL are now hearing that bishops and stake presidents are deciding that openly gay is okay in their congregations as long as there is no acting out (whatever that means). Add this to mixed orientation temple marriage being lauded. The next step (by no means the last) may be to get widespread Mormon acceptance, at least societally, of some form of same-sex marriage, no matter what the official Church stance is. If it’s the behavior they ultimately want legitimized, pretending at matrimony seems to be one way to get it. Even among those of us essentially against gay marriage, it could be that committed, monogamous same-sex unions, or the appearance of, will be thought the lesser of several other evils. And there are more travesties ahead. Could this really happen in the LDS community? Prominent Mormon, U. S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, recently announced his support of gay marriage to the entire nation, which is in essence an announcement of his support of homosexual behavior by another name.
Mormon homosexualists are boldly stepping forward. What do they want? It’s a burning question that needs to be asked.
Flower Children? Or Followers of Christ?
June 3, 2012
We have among us some outspoken members of The Church of Jesus Christ who have donned their Sunday clothes, taken up banners, and marched in Salt Lake City’s lewd Gay Pride Parade today, yes, in the name of Jesus. May we suggest that if people invoke the name of Christ they had better know what he is really about?
This group is saying that Jesus is all about love (they are handing out lollipops with stickers that read “love one another”) and that we should follow his example by reaching out to the gay community, “building bridges.” Is this accurate or appropriate in any way? What is Jesus’s love, also called the pure love of Christ, really about?
There may be many ways to hate people, but there is only one way to truly Love people, and that is through the kind of Love, with a capital L, Jesus alone exemplified. Jesus said to love one another as he loves, not the way we love, the way he loves. (Alas, we humans are not naturally very good at it.) It’s perfectly unselfish and righteous, that is, based in rightness and wishing the very best for the person in the moral, spiritual, and eternal sense. That’s a tall order. Jesus’ love for the Father in doing His will, and his love for us, God’s undeserving fallen children, in accomplishing the Atonement, are quintessential illustrations of this true, pure love we’re supposed to be striving to develop.
Another word for the pure love of Christ is charity. Bruce R. McConkie said, “Charity . . . is the pure love of Christ, a love so centered in righteousness that the possessor has no aim or desire except for the eternal welfare of his own soul and for the souls of those around him.” Key words: eternal welfare, souls. That is God’s business, the business Jesus was about.
The kind of Love Jesus wants us to learn does not begin and end with how nicely we treat others. Religion is not to be mistaken for mere neighborliness or social work. The devil himself has been known to treat others quite generously – he even offered to give Jesus everything: stuff, appetites, power. No, Real Love must begin in our heart of hearts as we seek the Spirit of the Lord to guide and correct. We are called upon to put off the natural man inside us so prone to wander. Christ invites each of us to become a new, selfless person – like him – intent on doing God's will, which will often mean putting aside one’s own will. This may cause friction in our human relationships, especially in today’s one-way, politically correct culture. So be it. Jesus himself said his coming would divide not just peoples, cities, and countries, but families (Matthew 10:34-37). Of course it’s entirely up to each of us whether we will choose God as our master or something or someone else instead.
This real Love has been called tough love, and rightly so. It’s difficult. It’s painful. And it can work to help people change for the better like nothing else if so desired. When Jesus said to love one another, even to love our enemies and do good to those who curse us, he didn’t mean for us to march in step with the decadent worldly parade; he meant for us to offer the Truth that can save souls.
People who don’t realize this, who think they can meet gays halfway with a see-no-evil, lollipop-love reminiscent of the anything-goes 1960s are very naive indeed and are part of the further vaporization of morality and religion in our society. Any of us who have any loyalty whatsoever to decency and propriety, to biological facts that defy the normalization of homosexuality, to God and His laws about chastity and sin, to the reality of male and female and motherhood and fatherhood, to mating and marriage, to keeping our passions and desires within His boundaries, to the priesthood, even to upholding mental and physical health, will find zero tolerance from the powerful gay community and its endorsers.
C. S. Lewis, talking about Love with a capital L, put it so well: "Love may forgive all infirmities and love still in spite of them; but Love cannot cease to will their removal . . . Love is something more stern and splendid than mere kindness."
The Love of Jesus? It isn’t comfort for its own sake, like a skin-deep massage, that makes us feel better about ourselves and each other here and now. It’s the sword of Truth, the real deal, elective heart surgery, or more accurately, a total, divine, voluntary heart transplant, that fits us for Everlasting Life.
I would like to express my feelings regarding the article "Counterfeit Marriage: A Tangled Web of Deceit". I was disappointed to see that LDS Living magazine would write about homosexuality without giving even the smallest amount of hope in the healing that can take place through the Atonement. Once again, we find that some members of the church would rather act as if the situation were hopeless. Either you live with being homosexual and live a lie or you commit suicide, seems to be what the general feeling is. I ask myself, why it is that there is seldom mentioned places where one can be treated. We know that there are places that exist that can help those afflicted overcome these feelings if there is a desire to be healed. Instead, these magazines are starting to sound like the world. This is not something people are born with. We know this because "The Family: A Proclamation To The World" states that "Gender is an essential characteristic of individual, premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Satan is behind this whole thing. The first commandment is to multiply and replenish the earth and Satan knows that he is victorious when he can convince us and confuse us into believing that we are different because we are attracted to someone who is the same sex. If we would look into the scriptures we find this cycle has happened before in Moses 5:53-57 and this abomination eventually led to the demise of the people in Noah's time.
It is frightening to see how many of our own faith have bought into this lie. I can't help but wonder if those who see homosexuality as a lie will be like the blind man in John 9, who was healed of his blindness by Jesus. When asked who healed him he told them that Jesus had made clay, and anointed his eyes and told him to go to the pool of Siloam and wash and that after that he had received his sight. When we are honest about homosexuality we are called haters and liars. Will we be cast out just as the blind man was because we see homosexuality for the lie that it is? We have been told that not all the persecution for our beliefs will come from without the church. I think the foundation of the foresaid truth has been laid.
–CM, Elk Ridge
We may eventually lose this battle but you and I will never go down without a fight. Our country and our church are at stake.
Keep up the fight.
Your message today had many good insights.
--S, St George
To me the fundamental falsehood is that SSA is immutable and therefore moral. I believe the following put this in question.
1. Gays are constantly and unrelentingly recruiting new partners. If attraction is immutable, then why are they trying so hard to convince others that they are not straight?
2. If attraction is immutable, akin to skin color, then a doctor should be able to identify the physical attribute, like pigmentation, that establishes attraction and tell someone medically whether they are straight or not.
3. Why impose limitations on others. Just because some gays claim they cannot change, that does not create a limitation on others who want to change. This strikes at the core of Christianity which believes in changing our natures through the atonement of Christ and repentance and being born again as a new man.
4. The choice to be intimate with someone is always a choice. When you have no choice in intimacy, it is called rape. Just because someone feels a sexual attraction that is never a justification, by itself, to act on that urge. Gays claim that they are more moral because they admit their attractions and act on them, rather than live a lie. The fact is that our society, as is appropriate, only allows us to act on our attractions under limited circumstances.
Thanks again for your efforts in the fight. Please know that others share your burden and resist falsehoods in their own manner.
Articles Worth Reading
Five Reasons Christians Should Continue to Oppose “Gay Marriage,” by Kevin DeYoung
Yesterday, to no one's surprise, President Obama revealed in an interview that after some "evolution" he has "concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married." This after the Vice-President came out last Sunday strongly in favor of gay marriage. Not coincidentally, the New York Times ran an article on Tuesday (an election day with a marriage amendment on one ballot) about how popular and not controversial gay television characters have become. In other words, everyone else has grown up so why don't you? It can seem like the whole world is having a gay old time, with conservative Christians the only ones refusing to party.
The temptation, then, is for Christians go silent and give up the marriage fight: "It's no use staying in this battle," we think to ourselves. "We don't have to change our personal position. We'll keep speaking the truth and upholding the Bible in our churches, but getting worked up over gay marriage in the public square is counter productive. It's a waste of time. It makes us look bad. It ruins our witness. And we've already lost. Time to throw in the towel." I understand that temptation. It is an easier way. But I do not think it is the right way, the God glorifying way, or the way of love.
Here are five reasons Christians should continue to publicly and winsomely oppose bestowing the term and institution of marriage upon same-sex couples:
1. Every time the issue of gay marriage has been put to a vote by the people, the people have voted to uphold traditional marriage. Even in California. In fact, the amendment passed in North Carolina on Tuesday by a wider margin (61-39) than a similar measure passed six years ago in Virginia (57-42). The amendment passed in North Carolina, a swing state Obama carried in 2008, by 22 percentage points. We should not think that gay marriage in all the land is a foregone conclusion. To date 30 states have constitutionally defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
Common Misconceptions About Homosexuality, by Dr. Neal Whitehead. Note: item 3 on the list states the truth and not the misconception!
1. Gays are 10% of the population
No academic would agree. Numerous surveys in many countries show
that (including bisexuals) gays are 2-3% of the population and lesbians
2. Gay relationships are as stable and long-lasting as those of
Gay relationships last about 2½ years for both gays and lesbians,
whereas in the divorce-prone USA a heterosexual couple has nearly an
even chance of reaching their silver wedding anniversary (25y).
3. Gays are extremely promiscuous
Both gays and lesbians have 3-4 times as many partners as
heterosexuals (comparison of medians).
4. Gays and lesbians are psychologically on par with heterosexuals
A good rule of thumb is that gays and lesbians have 3 times as many
problems. All are prone to suicide attempts. Otherwise problems are
mostly depression and other mood disorders for men and substance
abuse problems for women, though there are many others.
Anti-Bullying Crusader Attacks the Bible and Curses Christian Teens During High School Speech, from TheBlaze.com
Dan Savage, the founder of an anti-bullying campaign that has reportedly reached more than 40 million viewers, and has contributors that include President Obama to Hollywood stars, dove into unexpected territory while giving a speech at a high school journalism conference Friday.
There, instead the planned discussion on the dangers of bullying, Savage seemingly turned into a “bully” himself, albeit a powerful, adult one.
Reports say Savage’s speech quickly turned from the subject of anti-bullying into an event in “Christian-bashing,” causing as many as 100 students to simply walk out of the event.
California Senate Bill 1172 would ban psychologists from assisting patients who want to change from homosexuality, from Narth.com
California SB 1172 is a first-of-its-kind legislative effort to usurp the role of the professional mental-health associations and ban change-oriented psychological care to minors. This legislation assumes that sexual-orientation change efforts (SOCE) constitute a form of family rejection that will likely result in harm.
In reality, however, there is virtually no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the SOCE literature reporting harm among youth is extremely scarce and conducted only with non-representative samples. A single study was used by the bill’s supporters to support their claim. But it is remarkable that the authors of SB 1172 could even conceive that this particular study had any relevance to their legislative aims.
Furthermore, NARTH clinicians have long been aware that parents with traditional values need not “reject” their child; they can be encouraged to love and accept their children, even when they disapprove of their child’s sexual lifestyle choices.
Counterfeit Marriage: A Tangled Web of Deceit
May 8, 2012
We teach a standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. . . Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! President Boyd K. Packer, “Cleansing the Inner Vessel,” Oct. 2010 Gen. Conf.
You’ll have to come to your own conclusion why LDS Living Magazine, owned by Deseret Book and sold at Deseret Bookstores, has published an over-the-top cover article that is the antithesis of the above statement by President Packer, the second highest ranking leader in the LDS Church.
Our Story, Living with Same-sex Attraction by Ty and Danielle Mansfield, appearing in the May/June 2012 issue is a lengthy article illustrated with over a dozen photos, including a huge 2-page-spread close-up of the couple's faces (he is kissing her on the cheek). Written by the author of two gay-affirming books published by Deseret Book and his wife, the article is based on some serious new kookiness and some very false presumptions. What is presented as a happy, warm, fuzzy, and above all, highly spiritual article, is actually a tangled web of ignorance, delusion, and manipulation.
Please note that even more dangerous than the false representation of homosexuality as pure and noble, and the radical redefinition of some higher form of marriage that is supposedly nonsexual, is the presumptuous spiritual component in this article. The claim of personal revelation on sweeping topics that affect the very foundations of an entire people’s faith is this author's stock in trade. We quote from Ty Mansfield's book, In Quiet Desperation, in which he likens himself to Moses. "It was as if the Lord were saying to me, ' . . . Ancient Israel was called to build a tabernacle . . . You, my son, have likewise been called to a responsibility of great magnitude, for you have been called to build a kingdom'" (247). Please see Dr. A. Dean Byrd’s review of this book.
We apologize if the following intrudes on this couple's privacy. As always, we do not mean to attack individuals and most certainly wish only the best for this young couple and their innocent child. It is only because they have set themselves up as a light and voluntarily made their “mixed orientation marriage” an object of public concern by publicizing and defending what Pres. Packer called one of “Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage” that we feel we must respond to this article. Sorry this is so long; there are just so many things wrong with the article.
The article presumes people who experience SSA are doomed to have to live with it. Again, “Not so!” Many outgrow SSA or make a determined and successful effort to overcome and reorient their sexual feelings in the proper direction (PFOX, NARTH, Exodus International, JONAH, Standard of Liberty). You'd think this promising couple would seek to resolve this supposedly on-going problem, but there is no discussion of understanding where the feelings came from in the first place, or about getting help for rooting out the misguided thoughts and lawless lusts.
But wait a minute. Is the husband in this article really same-sex attracted? How do we know this? After all, his most recent actions, which are glowingly described, are undoubtedly heterosexual. In his own words, he was "drawn to Danielle in multiple ways." (Notice he uses the word drawn instead of its synonym attracted.) He enjoyed a whirlwind romance, married this woman for time and forever, posed for many happy wedding pictures, and subsequently fathered a child. And Danielle says her husband’s SSA “isn’t noticeable in our marriage.”
What is same-sex attraction anyway? It seems Mansfield has convinced his wife that SSA, although it is his claim to fame, doesn’t mean anything of any importance. She says, “I don’t think much about my husband experiencing SSA unless something stereotypical comes up, like he’s a much better decorator than I am and he is a better listener than any other man I’ve ever dated.” What does she think gayness is – just some outward trappings she happens to consider unusual in men? Then she has drunk the gay Koolaid and doesn’t know much about the opposite sex. Just because a man is artistic or a good listener does not mean he is homosexual. In fact, all healthy men have everything it takes to be men in all the important ways no matter what their talents or hobbies.
If SSA is just about innocuous outward characteristics, who cares about it? Why do we feel sorry for men who paint or sing? Why do they need special rights? Why do we care about this couple? It’s like any other couple. Danielle writes, “People sometimes want to know what it’s like to be married to someone who experiences same-sex attraction. My answer is, I don’t know.” So, LDS Living has published an article about nothing? It’s like an episode of Seinfeld.
This girl needs to know that if your husband is same-sex attracted it means he is sexually attracted to men, not women. He is turned on sexually by men, otherwise he is not same-sex attracted. To him the idea of thinking sexually of women is as distasteful as you thinking sexually of women.
It follows that either this couple has never consummated their marriage and instead used artificial insemination to get pregnant, or the SSA husband has prostituted himself who knows how many times in order to impregnate his wife and found it repulsive every time. On the other hand, if they have consummated and he didn’t find it repulsive, then he is heterosexual by any definition. That's right, if he is enjoying intimacy with this opposite sex person he says he loves “to spend time with,” he is heterosexual and is playing a horrible trick on his wife and everyone else by pretending to be homosexual. Yes, heterosexuality is very natural and common. In fact, it makes the world go 'round. We hear from Danielle herself that her husband "is a more loving and affectionate husband than I ever imagined."
Can it be that this couple has no understanding of either homosexuality or heterosexuality? Can it be that the publishers of this magazine don’t either? We can’t believe any intelligent adult could be that ignorant. Perhaps it’s more along the lines of denial, deception, or an agenda.
Click here to read the rest of this SoLVoice article
More Mormon Homosexualists Speak Out
April 25, 2012
Here's another Mormon-made video urging the LDS Church and its members to "change," to compromise their most basic and deeply-held doctrines and beliefs to include the homosexualism that has been embraced by mainstream society. The concern seems to be that if we don't accept their self-identified alternative sexuality, young people will feel rejected and/or commit suicide.
Despite the apparent sincerity, concern, and good intentions of the interviewees, there are many things wrong with the sentiments expressed on this video, already watched by 20,000 viewers. Please note that sentiments, opinions, views, just because someone expresses them, may not be valid or valuable. Some are totally mistaken, even harmful. Each of us must choose for ourselves to discern between truth and error.
We have listed some the the problems we found in the video, voiced or implied.
1. People do not commit suicide just because other people don't commend their romantic sexual desires. For example, do we think of unmarried teen couples who get pregnant as inordinately suicidal? No, and yet LDS doctrine and culture do not approve of what they have done. There are a number of reasons for suicidality, including mental and emotional illness, impulsiveness, lack of confidence, immaturity, dependence on others, lack of faith, inner conflict, addictions and total self-centeredness. These are the opposite of mental and emotional health, patience, confidence, maturity, reliance on Christ, faith in God, inner peace, spiritual-centeredness and humility, all of which would make us good stewards of our physical bodies. These latter qualities are the ones we need to teach and emphasize. We believe this video is doing more to emphasize the former and is therefore encouraging rather than preventing suicidality.
2. Gayness is not innate.
Click here to go to our SoL Blog and Read the rest of this Post.
SoL Blog Post:
Anybody Can Be, Nobody Has To Be April 25, 2012
A standard argument in favor of embracing the gay identity is that it is not chosen. We agree that under certain conditions, anybody can be tempted towards same sex sexual attraction. But let's think this through. If a desire or temptation corresponds with wrong or harmful acts, whether we choose it or not doesn't really matter. What matters is if we realize it for what it is and choose to beat it.
Do we choose a craving for chocolate? Or a feeling of anger? Or a wicked unkind thought? Probably not. It's just our human nature. The question is, what do we do with these passions? Do we proclaim ourselves hopeless chocolate gluttons? Raging lunatics? Devils? Is that just who we are? Is it okay, even special? Of course not.
If we're serious about health, order, and goodness, what we do is regulate ourselves. If we're religious that means we turn to God. We work at getting our hearts changed. It may be hard work, but we keep at it. If we're serious about God, order, and goodness, there is no giving up or giving in to the weakness.
What's missing in the LDS gay argument we see being swallowed by and emboldening so many these days, is this question:
If this condition or identity, whatever you want to call it, is so difficult, if it upsets family and conflicts with one's religious beliefs and prohibits a normal life, if these things are as important to them as they let on, whether a person felt they chose it or not, wouldn't they try to get help?
Click here to read the rest of this post and leave comments on our SoL Blog
It Gets Better at BYU? April 20, 2012
Some students made a video about being gay at BYU. Click here to watch it.
So let's get this straight. BYU students are getting away with making gay propaganda. It includes unverified information such as, "There are over 1,800 LGBT students attending Brigham Young University." It's a technically well-made montage of 20-something-year-old BYU-clad students accompanied by sad, somber music. These students confess self-determination as some sexual identity other than heterosexual: gay lesbian, bisexual. But it doesn't stop there. Students testify that it's all perfectly okay with God. There is no talk of chastity or sexual purity. Is there any doubt that they desire permission to act out (as if they aren't already to some degree), and they are telling the world that BYU and their Church, although still oppressive, is coming right along?
Here we have some obviously damaged, rebellious, confused, misguided young people on the mere brink of real living, of adult human relationships, of responsible adult experiences, of life's biggest decisions. And they believe they have lived enough to have figured everything out about themselves and about human sexuality, including unnatural, scripturally-condemned types of it that prohibit true marriage and pro-creation, inordinately cause chronic ill-heath conditions and spread horrible life-threatening diseases?
Young latter-day saints need to know that in order to champion homosexualism (in oneself or others), one needs to abandon truth, reality, science (no gay gene), biology (there are only 2 human sexes), and core tenets of their religion. They must reject the Atonement of Jesus Christ, scriptures, prophets and apostles from all dispensations, temple covenants (yes, we are all supposed to keep even our passions and desires within the Lord's boundaries), the Family Proclamation, and countless conference talks, books, manuals, and hymns (#336 School Thy Feelings for instance). If they ever had a witness of the Holy Ghost concerning the truth of all these things, they have to deny that, too. They have to ignore the knowledge and wisdom of the ages (which they are supposed to be learning at BYU) and invent an entirely new worldview and culture for themselves.
We have some outspoken young people willing to do this for many reasons, perhaps as a form of youthful rebellion, or just to feel involved in a popular cause, or to feel superior, enlightened, comfortable with their current lusts or with friends, and popular in the eyes of the world. Do they realize what they are doing? Is championing various unnatural sexual feelings worth giving up everything else? Really? All this that is happening -- it's all in the scriptures. One wonders, have these kids read their scriptures? If they have, they don't understand them, as Nephi put it.
To the precious, misguided young people on the video, we say: You live in an upside-down world where youth and a godless trendy culture have been unwisely put on a pedestal and God's timeless goodness and wisdom are derided and disregarded. It reminds us of the silly 60's movie, Wild in the Streets, where the hippies put all the adults over 30 in camps and kept them drugged so they could run the world however they felt like running it. Youth is by nature a rash, rebellious, emotional, ignorant, prideful time of life. And the truth is, as the LDS scholar Hugh Nibley, who himself knew 20 languages, put it, none of us are very pure or brave or good or wise, even in adulthood. That's why we need God whose love and rules and principles never change. That's why we all need a Savior who offers essential divine redemption for our many weaknesses and sins and errors. That's why we need the Spirit to constantly humble and correct us.
We didn't note much discussion of the true purposes of the Godhead on the video, rather it was all about the students' purposes, their feelings, desires, sufferings, and comforts and how they conveniently have come to know that God has changed His plan to include their particular proclivities. It's true that God loves us all no matter what, a bit like a good parent unconditionally loves a naughty child, but our feelings, thoughts, motives, and actions often require purifying, changing, and improving. Not on the video.
That's why no one should give this video any credence. These are culturally-indoctrinated and emboldened young people who have, in their inexperienced youth, rashly and wholeheartedly embraced politicized, pop-culture sexual identities despite God's boundaries for sexuality in heart, mind, and body. One should wonder how and where they got these ideas cemented; one girl on the video admitted she turned to the internet where her wayward sexual feelings were validated and welcomed. The internet. Not the scriptures. Not the Spirit. The internet. Enough said. These young people need to know they have rejected the accumulated wisdom of the ages and summarily dismissed the spiritually-demanding Atonement of Jesus Christ. They have ignored and disparaged the availability of cutting-edge, professional, gospel-based therapy and the possibility of reorienting to heterosexuality and a normal life. They also obviously reject their agency, stewardship, and obligation to strive against sinfulness in all its forms to the end of mortality. They are so far conditioned into today's worldly ways that the above glorious gifts are things which they seem to know and care nothing about.
Think about it. Boundaries. Wisdom. Christ. Hope. Help. Health. Normalcy. Agency. Obligation. Stewardship. Progression. Nope, not interested.
It gets better at BYU? We wonder if on these critical and essential topics it could get any worse.
BYU Professor Invites “Gay” Students to Make Presentations at Meeting on Campus
March 27, 2012
BYU Sociology Professor Charlie Morgan has scheduled a meeting on campus where students will share their stories of what it’s like to be gay at BYU. A Standard of Liberty subscriber sent us the attached picture of a flier being circulated around campus, which states that the meeting, scheduled for April 4, 2012, 7:00 p.m., in room 445 of the MARB, is sponsored by the BYU Sociology department.
SoL called and spoke with Professor Morgan and Renata Forste, the department chairman. When asked why the meeting was being held, we were told that BYU students need a greater understanding of homosexual attraction in order to be kinder and more accepting of students who experience it. We were told these gay students are keeping the law of chastity and are not acting out sexually, so there is no honor code issue involved.
We wondered how Prof. Morgan could know this, if all students who will attend the meeting have been screened for sexual abuse done to them or by them, or for wrong ideas and attitudes about sex and sexuality, or for current sexual impurity, how this is being defined, and if the gay students have told the truth. Homosexual behaviors are by nature practiced and spread in secret, BYU being no exception. Our book Captain of My Soul, the true story of a young man’s dark past experience during his freshman year at BYU ten years ago getting initiated into homosexual behaviors by older men via chat rooms and phone calls, shines the light on the grim reality of these covered sins. If there really are any innocent, clueless students jumping on the now public gay bandwagon for the novelty, youthful rebelliousness, sense of belonging, special attention, or politics of it, they had better find out quick what gayness really is –and so had Prof. Morgan – or they won’t be innocent or ignorant for long. They will be recruited in earnest.
When we suggested that giving talks promoting being gay at BYU was advocating for homosexuality we were reminded that claiming a gay sexual orientation is no longer an honor code issue. It’s true that BYU, pressured by activists, changed its honor code in 2007 to allow open homosexual self-identification, but according to the honor code itself, advocating toward unchastity of any kind (and homosexuality is always unchaste) is most certainly still an honor code issue. We quote: “As a matter of personal commitment, faculty, administration, staff, and students of Brigham Young University seek to demonstrate in daily living on and off campus those moral virtues encompassed in the gospel of Jesus Christ . . . In addition, students may not influence or seek to influence others to engage in behavior inconsistent with the Honor Code . . .” [emphasis ours]
The question is, how can homosexuality be all right in principle, as in homosexual attraction, but wrong in practice, as in homosexual behavior? If we concede that it is right in principle, isn’t the next step to accept the practice, even celebrate it? Mustn’t we?
Gay activism has done a great job presenting homosexuality as harmless, equal to heterosexuality, even virtuous, honest, praiseworthy. But homosexuality is not harmless, natural to the human body, chaste, pure, or wholesome in any form. The very nature of homosexuality is out of bounds. When SoL asserted that the basis of so-called same-gender attraction is same-sex sexual attraction, which is unchaste just as adulterous lust is unchaste, nourished by sinful thoughts and feelings, Prof. Morgan disagreed. He said there are many aspects to same-gender attraction: emotional, social, physical. This may be so for some, but it is sexuality alone that separates gayness from nonsexual same-sex relationships. Emotional and social attraction between members of the same sex is normal and acceptable; it’s called friendship. The only thing that makes “same-gender attraction” controversial is the fact that it is sexual in nature. The desire of homosexual attraction (lust) is a romantic, physically intimate, sexual relationship. Denying this is naive in the extreme. As to acting out sexually, Church resources have indicated that inappropriate same-sex behavior includes all private intimate physical behaviors as well as holding hands, hugging, kissing, etc. In addition, everyone should know that same-sex pornography, internet gay chat rooms, phone calls, support groups such as BYU’s USGA (Understanding Same Gender Attraction) and all other gatherings supporting homosexual inclinations also play a huge role in justifying and inflaming these desires.
SoL has attended meetings of BYU groups who claim to be all about helping others understand homosexual attraction. There are internet sites where interested people participate in discussions and report on these meetings. They are all about affirming anyone’s gay proclivities regardless of traumatic causes and harmful effects. Homosexual advocacy is about affirming, embracing, and celebrating the idea, the whole idea of homosexuality, including behavior. It’s about redefining marriage to include gay temple marriage. BYU teachers and students who pretend this isn’t so need to wise up.
What is striking is that these meetings and sites never talk about overcoming homosexual attraction. Speakers are invited who confirm and praise the gay orientation. No one speaks or advocates for the immeasurable worth of all souls, for purity, chastity, healing, or repentance, for overcoming the natural man. No one is invited to speak or advocate for schooling one’s feelings, seeking the Spirit to discern between absolute truth and error, or for rooting out and conquering wrong thought patterns, homosexual attractions, and sex addiction. Indeed, wisdom and knowledge and everlastingly true, gospel-based principles are taboo in these settings. Where is the kindness, support, and understanding for the valiant student silently struggling to overcome unwanted homosexual thoughts and feelings? Where are the resources?
Prof. Morgan related that the BYU counseling center no longer works with students on overcoming homosexual attractions, but merely on learning how to deal with them. So, according to this professor, young people are being told, without the benefit of knowledge and understanding as to how this came about and the spiritual, mental, and physical health dangers, that gay is the way they are, and here’s how to accept it. There is no concern for the mortal testing, temporal future, or eternal soul of the young person, no understanding of their impressionable, impulsive, and fallen human nature, no interest in past or future suffering, and no cheering for righteousness, excellence, and nobleness, only what appears to be a perverse motivation to advance the current worldly whim. Can this travesty be true? Perhaps partly. But we happen to know there are still some right-thinking people at BYU, including at the Counseling Center and send them our prayers.
Suicidal feelings and attempts, and depression are always mentioned by those promoting the social acceptance of youth homosexuality. Our conversation with Prof. Morgan was no exception; these serious problems are always ridiculously simplified to putting the blame on others. A victim mentality passes off personal responsibility and never helped anyone. Young people who feel suicidal or depressed are immature and easily persuaded, distracted, and recruited into all sorts of escapist causes and addictions. These problems may have less to do with sexuality than with the terrible conflict between right and wrong raging in the soul. There may be mental illness, as in the famous but misrepresented case of Stuart Matis. Many may desperately need clinical and medical attention. Tragically, the deep core issues are not being emphasized or even addressed. Instead, all is focused on the popular and politicized, self-identified gayness of the sick person.
Apart from mental illness, it takes humility and repentance and an abandonment of sinful desires possible through Christ in order to change and improve ourselves. This can happen to everyone. In fact, thousands of people with homosexual tendencies and lifestyles have left it all behind. And yet BYU is embracing the lowest common denominator by fostering the idea that this probably cannot and therefore need not be done, that once an impressionable young person growing up in our oversexed, pro-gay environment has thought, felt, or experimented with homosexual sexuality to any degree, they are to be labeled and identified by authority figures, not as a human being with sins to overcome like everyone else, but as a special person who gets a pass from natural man sinfulness and will be gay for the rest of his or her life.
We asked Prof. Morgan if he had anyone scheduled to speak who had a story to tell about successfully overcoming homosexual attraction. He said no, that he could not find any. It was suggested to him that he had not tried to find any, which he did not deny. SoL wants to know why someone would invite people to talk about a heart-breaking, soul-destroying situation some suffering people find themselves in, and not at the same event have someone there to give hope that they can leave the misery behind and live a normal life?
This meeting, where young people with homosexual attractions will talk about how okay SGA is, and how bad they have it at BYU, is ill-conceived. Not only will it not be helpful, it will be harmful, harmful to the souls of those giving the talks, harmful to those young minds listening who will be supported in covering both inward and outward sins and initiated further into homosexuality, and harmful to all those these people come in contact with.
SoL remembers that just a couple of years ago, being openly gay and advocating for homosexuality was considered against the honor code. Apparently it’s perfectly fine now, no matter what the honor code still states about unchastity. This shows that rules and codes and laws don’t matter so much as the popular consciousness does. Where is our will? Is it with God, with teaching His timeless correct and saving principles no matter how unpopular, or is it with the sycophantic political correctness of the day?
If you are concerned about this trend at BYU and the influence it is undoubtedly having on young people, we encourage you to write and call any or all of the BYU/LDS church officials listed below and ask them to cancel the meeting. Tell your friends about this and ask them to call and write. You could also call offices of General Authorities of the Church, 801-240-1000, and alert them. Letters are good, but phone calls are the fastest way of getting through.
Professor Charlie Morgan. 801-422-3652
BYU Sociology Department
Provo UT 84602
Renata Forste. 801-422-3146
BYU Sociology Department Chairman
Provo UT 84602
Dean Ben Ogles. 801-422-2084
BYU College of Family, Home and Social Sciences
Provo UT 84602
Carri Jenkins. 801-422-1166
Provo UT 84602
Janet Scharman. 801-422-2387
BYU VP of Student Life
Provo UT 84602
Cecil O. Samuelson. 801-422-2521
Provo UT 84602
LDS Church Public Affairs
Premarital Sexual Abstinence Controversial in Utah
The Utah legislature passed HB 363, which calls for the high school sex edcuation curriculum to support abstinence only when discussing sex. This conservative approach supports marriage between man and woman, and sexual fidelity during marriage. The bill has been sent to Governor Herbert for his signature. Those in support of comprehensive sex education have started a campaign to urge the Governor to veto the bill. We at SoL are in favor of HB 363. Paul Mero, of the Sutherland Institute wrote a post on their blog which explains very well how we and many others feel.
The new sex education proposal, HB 363, has drawn lots of attention (and emotion) on all sides. And for good reason. HB 363 obviously represents more than a sex education proposal. It represents another front in the culture war over Utah values, how we see ourselves as human beings, how we view the proper role of government and, ultimately, how we view freedom.
This is my case for HB 363.
The most important idea to understand about lasting freedom is that it requires us to be our better selves. Most of my arguments with libertarians are over this point. Freedom is not simply “individual liberty” or “economic freedom.” Those qualities are important components of freedom, but incomplete. A complete definition is that freedom is the sum of liberty and virtue. Freedom requires human beings to be their better selves. Of course, implied is that we know what it means to be a human being.
A second important point to understand about lasting freedom is that government should be limited. But not in the way many people understand the meaning of “limited government.” To help human beings be our better selves, we surround ourselves with social encouragements: family, friends, religion, community groups, philanthropic and civic groups, educational opportunities, etc.
We also create governments. For instance, becoming our better selves requires people living in community to create rules about how we’re going to get along. This is the reason we have a system of justice in America. If we didn’t care about becoming our better selves, in the name of lasting freedom, we’d simply revert to the Wild West rule of law – every man for himself.
In this context, government has a limited role to play in helping us preserve our lasting freedom. That’s the meaning of limited government. That’s the proper role of government. Government has a limited role in helping us become our better selves. Many legal scholars refer to this role as “educative” – meaning the law not only restrains, it educates.
So how does sex education in public schools (i.e., government schools) fit into this broader theory of freedom?
Simple: a society interested in lasting freedom requires human beings to responsibly procreate and avoid irresponsible choices that burden society. Responsible procreation, as we’ve discovered over millennia, happens within the bonds of marriage between one man and one woman.
In other words, responsible sex education in our public schools must be set in the context of no sexual relations outside of the bonds of marriage. And that is the point of HB 363.
Critics of HB 363 insist the purpose of sex education in our public schools is to prevent, as much as possible, the unfortunate consequences of sex outside of marriage. It’s an “insurance policy” of sorts, they insist. They say it’s the only reasonable thing to do given that most Utah youth will have premarital sex. And, after all, if we can keep our youth from experiencing the ill consequences of pre-marital sex, why wouldn’t we?
There is a charm to that argument, especially if one doesn’t believe in the freedom construct I just shared. In other words, if the goal is simply to “sell insurance” to our youth in public schools, why not “sell insurance”?
The critic’s slogan is “education, not ignorance.” So, in that spirit, let me educate these critics.
Selling kids an “insurance policy” regarding premarital sexual relations doesn’t protect any youth from sexually transmitted diseases or pregnancy. The universal and public availability of contraception does not guarantee that any youth will use it. The only consequence-free sexual relation between youth is no sexual relation at all.
Yes, premarital sex is a reality. So, too, are sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies even when contraception is at hand – quite literally meaning that the effective mitigation of these ill consequences from premarital sex is about the “choice” youth make, not about the “means” whereby they have sex after they’ve made the choice. Comprehensive sex education is all about the means. Abstinence-only sex education is all about the choice.
This is the point where our understanding of the proper role of government becomes relevant. Sex education in our public schools should address the choice, not the means. Furthermore, it should prioritize helping us to become our better selves, not our selfish selves. Comprehensive sex education is all about our selfish selves (i.e., attempting to mitigate the consequences of poor choices). Abstinence-only sex education is all about our better selves (i.e., attempting to influence the choices youth make).
We don’t teach youth how to drink liquor, not even responsibly. Nor do we teach youth how to consume narcotics, not even responsibly. We tell them not to. Teaching youth to have “safe sex” is like teaching youth to “drink responsibly.” Can people have “safe sex”? Yes. Can people “drink responsibly”? Yes. But in both cases we don’t teach youth to do either. We tell them don’t do it at all.
We are not arguing about the availability of contraception in a free society. We’re arguing about the availability of contraception in our public (government) schools. While I have my personal opinion about the work Planned Parenthood does, my concern about Planned Parenthood is in the context of government-funded and endorsed activities. The fact is that anyone can visit Planned Parenthood, in person or online, and get whatever “education” they need about sex. The question for us is should our public schools provide under force of law what Planned Parenthood provides voluntarily? My answer is no, for all of the reasons I’ve articulated.
Lastly, our governments, in their proper role, must be encouraging the best expectations and personal responsibility within our youth. Comprehensive sex education, as has been so clearly defined by the critics of HB 363 themselves, caters to a culture of dysfunction. It assumes the worst about us as human beings (i.e., that we will unavoidably choose to make poor choices) and it serves up attempts to mitigate those consequences by seeking to perfect our “skills” within the dysfunction.
Think of the timing of this educational process. Both comprehensive and abstinence-only sex education are premised on educating youth prior to a choice being made. Even most supporters of comprehensive sex education aren’t cheering on youth to have premarital sex.
Proponents of comprehensive sex education (i.e., opponents of HB 363) are attempting to influence the choices of youth in a good way, just as proponents of abstinence-only sex education are. The difference is that comprehensive sex education undermines, or at least severely contradicts, that attempt to influence those choices. Because law is educative and public schools are government schools, youth receive a mixed and confusing message under comprehensive sex education: Public authorities tell me no, but then go out of their way to show me how. That contradiction is a misuse of government, in my opinion, and certainly an injustice (even an insult) to our youth.
Abstinence-only sex education, as embodied in HB 363, is the only just, rational and consistent way to influence the choices of youth in public schools about proper and healthy sexual relations. It is the only justifiable instruction in such matters if lasting freedom is an important consideration to us.
Few Gays are Actually "Marrying"
We quote here from a Washington Post article by David Crary, April 26, 2006 about a study assessing how many gays actually are getting married in places where it's legal. Turns out the numbers are relatively very small. The percentage in the gay population is in the single digits.
Maggie Gallagher, president of the Institute for Marriage and co-author of the study, said interpretations of the findings might vary according to one's views on gay marriage.
One faction, she said, might conclude that opposition to gay marriage was an overreaction given that seemingly modest numbers of people were choosing it. Another faction, she said, might look at the same numbers and contend that they did not justify overturning the long-standing concept of marriage as exclusively heterosexual.
"That's why the debate is so contentious," Gallagher said. "In one view, if you treat gay couples any differently, that's akin to racism. There's another view that there's something special about the unions of husbands and wives."
"Whether same-sex marriage will emerge as commonplace or normative among gays and lesbians, or fade as time and novelty passes, cannot yet be determined," [said the study].
No matter how many gays actually take advantage of legalized same-sex marraige, the bigger problem is modern society's sanction of this chimerical travesty. We seem to be living in a world that has no problem selling its soul, that is, sound principles and basic reality, for whatever novelty is percieved as popular at the time. No society can long endure on such a shaky foundation.
by Dr. Lindsay M. Curtis, M.D., Ogden, Utah: I can’t speak for the Church, but let me share some ideas that seem appropriate to me as a doctor and as a Latter-day Saint.
A liberal-permissive element of the medical profession has been extremely outspoken on the subject of homosexuality.
In his letter to the Romans, Paul states: “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly. …” (Rom. 1:26–27.)
We do not interfere with a man’s free agency when we teach him the truths contained in the Bible.
Our modern prophets have been no less forceful in teaching us the Lord’s way and his will in regard to sexuality.
Homosexuals and lesbians seldom are happy people. Theirs is a relationship that is unnatural, one not bound by fidelity, trust, or loyalty, and one totally lacking in the meaningful family relationships that marriage offers. Homosexuality often espouses emotional problems because of the constant insecurity inherent in a relationship neither sanctioned by nor protected by the law.
Because there is no legal bond, homosexuality too often encourages, or at least permits, promiscuity.
To say that “no one gets hurt” is presumptive. Homosexuals are hurt by the unacceptability of the relationship, not only by society, but also by themselves. This is evidenced by their almost universal desire that their children (if they have any) not follow the same pattern.
Someone does get hurt. There is harm in homosexuality. Many homosexuals seek to introduce others into their practice, often those in their tender, impressionable years. Many studies have indicated that such early homosexual experience may interfere with normal sexual adjustment in subsequent marriage.
Nor is homosexuality compatible with peace of mind, tranquility of soul, or with the Spirit of our Father in heaven that all of us want, need, and enjoy when we live in accordance with his laws.
To “persecute” homosexuals would be wrong, just as it would be wrong for us to persecute anyone. We must try to understand why they have chosen this way of life. Many of them want help and can be helped. But we should also understand that homosexual relationships are morally wrong according to the laws of God.
Just as the Word of Wisdom is the Lord’s way with or without medical proof of its value to our health, so likewise the moral law taught by the Church does not require any medical proof of its value to our spiritual and physical health. It is sufficient that the Lord has told us to marry, to have children, and to do this according to the righteous ways of the law of God. In this lies physical health, emotional stability, and true happiness.
Book Review of Light in the Closet:
Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change
by Arthur Goldberg, Red Heifer Press, Los Angeles, 2008, second printing 2009.
His Word to a Thousand Generations
January 4, 2012
Before being asked to review Arthur Goldberg’s book, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change, just about all I knew about the Jewish faith came from Fiddler on the Roof, Dr. Laura, and the novels of Chaim Potok. Now, after carefully reading 575 pages and filling many legal pad pages with notes I feel I have a bit better understanding of Judaism: of the utmost sacredness in which they hold their books of scripture, of the timelessness of their Holiness Code for sexual morality (Leviticus 18), and of their doctrinally-based obligation to offer hope and help to all souls struggling against unwanted thoughts, feelings, and conduct which are not in keeping with G-d’s will. The author means to educate the public in behalf of strugglers of his faith dealing with unwanted same-sex sexual attraction and behaviors, but reminds us that G-d’s everlasting Truth applies and should be available to all of His children for all time. (In this review I am respecting the Jewish custom used throughout the book of avoiding spelling out the name of G-d in case it should have to be erased.)
Ancient Wisdom and the Sacred
In his careful study of Torah prohibitions and G-d’s plan for His children, Goldberg implicitly calls for a general revival of and return to wisdom and a sense of the sacred. Here we are living in a world where many people care only about the superficial and fun, the here and now, the self and its pleasures. In a repudiation of the most fundamental duties of humanity, our culture no longer concerns itself with the dead and the aged and what we must learn from them, or with the unborn and the young and what we must leave for them. All privileges go to the current movers and shakers. Thus we see our huge individual and national problems with spending, debt, hedonism, abortion, euthanasia, and the demand and creation of new sexual “rights.” Turning our backs on the past and shrugging our shoulders regarding the future, we’ve lost interest in and reverence for the sacrosanct, exchanging it for the false, the vain, and the foolish.
Goldberg reminds us that wisdom is an understanding of reality and truth that ultimately gives the only real consolation. He asserts that G-d’s ancient word must remain our guide, that any sexuality other than what G-d decrees is sexual disorientation, and warns us that we live in a climate of sexual indulgence and experimentation that is out to deliberately corrupt young children. “Once we throw away the compass of right and wrong bequeathed to us by ancient wisdom, we find almost everything to be subjective in opinion–usually the result of a little self-indulgence and a good deal of creative rationalization. By contrast, the Jewish People have lived for well over three thousand years in accordance with a deeply rooted persuasion that morality is not some vague notion of living in a general state of rosy self-satisfaction, but a specific and intricately defined set of dos and don’ts . . . that regulate every possible aspect of public and private life” (5).
Throughout the book is an overwhelming sense of compassion for those who, damaged by abuse and influenced by pervasive wrong ideas, have separated themselves from G-d and personal growth through temptation and transgression, who are miserable with “sexual conflictedness . . . in which one’s arousals, fantasies, behavior or sexual identity conflict with one’s deepest religious beliefs and values” (8) and who yearn for a way back toward the authentic self, truth, and the sacred. “For Jews, ‘establishing boundaries’ means respecting the differences between sacred and profane, permitted and forbidden, pure and impure, man and woman, human and animal—because that is the way of peace and well-being, and it is through inner peace and physical and mental well being that a person develops his or her fullest potential” (226).
The Holiness Code
“Nowhere are the contradictions between Jewish teachings and today’s cultural climate more evident—or more profoundly confusing to the individual—than in the area of sexual morality and conduct” (107). Anyone can see that in practically all denominations of worship has crept a milquetoast attitude toward reality, a shyness toward truth, a weakening of doctrine. Reports Goldberg of the Jewish faith, “Most recently, even the Conservative Movement has attempted to develop a ‘new age’ theology that redefines sexual morality in a way that legitimizes the theory and practice of homosexuality. Meanwhile, the Orthodox community stands firm, also bearing the brunt of politically correct criticism and opprobrium” (104-5).
Goldberg gives mighty evidence that there is no ambiguity in orthodox Judaism when it comes to G-d’s boundaries for human sexuality, both in thought and deed. The Holiness Code is clear. Sexuality is either holy or a desecration, with nothing in between. As Goldberg puts it, “How can one advance in the path of spirituality when one is enslaved by one’s own physical desires and passions and entangled in a web of reciprocal sexual exploitation? Spirituality, or the devoted quest for the deeper meaning of life and of the universe, demands a focus away from one’s bodily appetites and cravings. This principle has been fundamental to all the world’s great religions . . . Judaism was the first religion to articulate this principle clearly, accomplishing this by making the laws of human conduct paramount over bodily desires and needs” (101). But today, repudiating the Torah is being done “in a desperate attempt to fashion a pro-gay theology that will satisfy political correctness and accommodate the growing power of the gay lobby and their media friends” (173).
Seeing all this occur, Goldberg co-founded Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality, which he informs us has now been renamed to Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing because of the increased demand for help and resources in all areas of sexual brokenness. JONAH is one of several organizations bravely dedicated to spreading knowledge of the causes, nature, treatment, and religious implications of same-sex sexuality. JONAH helps individuals who struggle with any condition “in which a person’s sexual behaviors, desires or fantasies are inconsistent with the Torah’s treatment of sex as pure, holy, and the private and exclusive domain of marriage between man and woman” (9). Goldberg goes to great pains to give scriptural foundations of G-d’s boundaries for human sexuality, and then goes to even greater pains to persuade readers that the sexually broken can avail themselves of the possibility of healing, a change of heart, forgiveness, and spiritual growth. As Rabbi Dresner stated, “the first lesson in holiness is to remain sexually pure” (177).
As is necessary for any book sincerely addressing homosexuality today, the author brings us up-to-date with gay activism, how in recent decades this vice was systematically transformed from an act to a condition to an identity and a cause celebre with the help of sexualized education and media systems and the public blessing (49). He chronicles how our society has been conditioned to reject G-d’s rules for sexual morality (Holiness Code), making homosexuality, in the words of the gay activists Kirk and Madsen themselves, an abstract social question thereby distracting the public from “the grim realities of homosexual behavior” (55). Gay activists now work to lower age of consent laws and aggressively model and promote homosexuality in our schools through panels, books and booklets, instructions in gay sex, providing information on where to meet gays, acting out in skits and plays, all without parental notification or consent. Goldberg rightly calls this movement “the sexual brainwashing of school children” being carried out under the false pretense of promoting safer schools.
Goldberg quotes John McKeller, leader of a group called HOPE (Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism): “Introducing kindergarten and grade one students to alternative behaviors and lifestyles is psychological pedophilia. You don’t have to engage solely in physical contact to molest a child. You can diddle with their minds and their emotions. And this is exactly what some of my radical brothers and sisters are up to. And this is exactly what a disheartening majority of educators, school trustees and teachers unions endorse” (97).
Tragically, the scientific community also continues to succumb to radical homosexualism, beginning with the politically-pressured removal of homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association’s manual of disorders in 1973. This travesty has reached a point where most psychiatrists today are treating sufferers according to widespread gay propaganda rather than reliable science, responsible ethics, proper therapy, and the client’s own wishes. Generously sprinkled through the book are testimonials from real sufferers and ex-gays. One ex-lesbian says, “People like myself have been politicized out of getting the help we desire by the one-sided arguments presented by the gay lobby” . . . [F]inding no one respecting my desires, I set about reading everything I could get my hands on . . . Nearly a decade later, I have experienced the shift to a heterosexual orientation along with an exponential improvement in overall well-being.” (40).
Incredibly, many professionals now insist that homosexual tendencies must be affirmed (including through the use of pornography and sexual experimentation, even for young teens) and that an invention they call “internal homophobia” is really the cause of the unhappy homosexual’s suicidal misery. “What has happened, in essence, is that political correctness in regard to homosexuality has substantially eroded the right of a patient to be fully informed of all treatment options and to determine his or her own therapy” (40). “So when a therapist encourages a resistant SSA client to live his fantasies and enjoy them at the cost of his or her ‘personal value system,’ that therapist is actively working to degrade the meaningfulness of that client’s life” (42). Two must-read case studies in chapter two chronicle tragic results of this highly misguided and abusive pseudo-professional course of action.
Speaking of professional care, Goldberg devotes an entire chapter to the tragedy of “sexual reassignment surgery” by which deep emotional and mental problems are merely artificially masked by the mutilation of healthy bodies by medical doctors. He reports a study in which it was found that SRS is actually cooperating with a mental illness and that these people’s basic problems remained unchanged after surgery. Said Dr. Paul McHugh after ordering the SRS clinic at Johns Hopkins closed in 1979, “We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it” (286).
A stunning story not to be missed is contained in the page notes about a five-year-old boy who exhibited all-around effeminate behavior and repeatedly demanded his penis be cut off. Fortunately, rather than steer the boy’s parents toward SRS, the MD they consulted (a member of the American College of Pediatricians), astutely looked into the environmental and medical factors that could be causing the child’s problems, and found several, including a painful medical condition affecting the boy’s penis (263-4).
No, Goldberg is not squeamish, and neither can the serious reader be. He devotes sections of the book to the strong Jewish judgment against masturbation, pornography, child sexual abuse, and bestiality. Here are some tidbits: “The habit of masturbation . . . renders many homosexual persons vulnerable to promiscuity. First, fantasy and masturbation, then cruising the haunts, and later, finding someone for a one-night stand” (233). “[T]o abuse a child for sexual gratification is to violate that child in body and mind and soul at an age when all three are defenseless” (217). Citing new-age bestiality advocates (yes, they exist), Goldberg points out that “because animals are unable to be fully informed, communicate consent, or speak out against the abuse,” bestiality is animal sexual abuse (223).
Contrary to the unabashed one-sided sexual propaganda we are increasingly bombarded with, Goldberg believes that sexual disorientation should be looked at with an objective eye that distinguishes between normal and abnormal, right and wrong, health and sickness, personal fulfillment or personal frustrations. Along with great thinkers throughout the ages, he points out that the normalization of sexual vice levies a huge cost to both the individual and society as a whole.
Real science, as opposed to junk science founded on intimidation from activists, proves that G-d’s traditional boundaries for sexual morality, that is, confining sex to man-woman marriage, are best for human society, for families, and for individuals. As A. Dean Byrd, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, noted, in Light in the Closet Goldberg does “a masterful job bringing the truths of science in harmony with the Truth of the Ages.”
Goldberg points out that without rules and laws for human conduct, only the opinions and fashions of the moment remain (215), and why should those be trustworthy? Of course today’s trendy political correctness here is doing more harm than good, whereas the Holiness Code, by any other name, is still as true and as important as ever for everyone, G-d’s word to a thousand generations.
Bridging the GAP
In our reading we learn that “Torah sees sex in general as an enormously powerful force of nature that needs to be harnessed and controlled in order to realize its full potential for good” (108). We understand the Jewish belief that homosexuality “constitutes activity that will diminish an individual’s capacity to fulfill, in his own life, G-d’s expressed plan for creation. . . and achieve his full potential as a human being” (115). And we see that in Judaism “compassion does not mean condoning or remaining silent in the face of another’s errors” (104). Now, we ask, what is Goldberg’s solution? Is there hope for Jewish people with unwanted SSA who desire sexual orientation in accordance with their personal value systems? What should replace misguided public legitimization, corrupted science, and demoralizing oversexed gay-affirming therapy?
The overwhelming message in Light in the Closet is that there is hope and help for those with unwanted sexual disorientation. According to traditional Jewish teachings, the power of repentance is unlimited and homosexuality is a reversible transgression. Change for the homosexual is distinctly possible from the inside out.
In Goldberg’s experience, the Jewish homosexuals he has known are unwitting victims stuck in the middle of a reprehensible trilateral attack. On one side are militant gay activists who insist they cannot change, on another side are ultra-conservatives who loathe them, and on the third side are misguided and unethical psychiatrists who urge them to accept their gayness while ignoring their patients’ wishes and deeply-held, conflicted value systems.
Asserting, with the support of real science, that sexual attraction is primarily an acquired and not an inherited characteristic, and that sexual freedom always leads to self-destruction, not to mention social decline as shown throughout history (173-4), JONAH promotes GAP (gender affirmation process) through free will and free choice as the panacea for the problem of unwanted same-sex sexualization and sexual conflictedness. GAP seems to emphasize two equally important factors: (1) the necessity of rooting out the causes of a person’s homosexuality and (2) affirming the gender of one’s birth. Indeed, behavior will change as a bi-product of intense self-examination of past issues and true gender rediscovery (as encoded in one’s DNA). A great portion of the book is devoted to these two issues, including scientific research studies, clinical technics, and case studies from professional experts. As to sexual reorientation therapies for those with unwanted homosexuality which are much maligned by gay activist propaganda, even pro-gay scientists admit there is no harm. In fact, studies show a high level of success in development of healthy and wholesome heterosexual attraction as a result of reparative, gender-affirming therapy.
Not to be missed, especially in chapter 15, are the experiences and testimonials of ex-gays who have been helped to reorient to heterosexuality through JONAH and GAP. Not only do individuals break free of obsessive, harmful, and indecent behaviors, but they free themselves from inappropriate sexual fantasizing and arousal. Yes, says the Talmud and other sources, thoughts can be sinful and harmful, and thought patterns can be changed: “The thought of sin is worse than the actual sin.” Perhaps my favorite quotes in the entire book are: “[T]o engage in sinful thought is to sin with the noblest portion of the self” (201) and “It is not a light thing to restore one’s purity of soul” (380). Indeed, this applies in both homosexual and heterosexual contexts, and every circumstance. We all can and must submit not just the physical body but the inner vessel for divine cleansing if change is to be sincere and lasting. Goldberg provides a good description of what it takes to change from The People Can Change website:
“A man with homosexual attractions will usually maintain them unless he consciously surrenders them. [. . .] [S]urrender is letting go. It is choosing to release specific obstacles–whatever is holding you back and hurting you. It is a deliberate mental, emotional, and spiritual attitude of giving away these obstacles to G-d . . . in a spirit of humble trust in the wisdom, strength and goodness of the Divine Power.”
Yes, people can and do change, if they so desire. Thousands have changed. One psychotherapist and recovered homosexual urges the religious community toward a proactive attitude: “Let us promote true healing and restoration by getting involved, reaching out, and being there for those who wish to change. Remember this is a behavior, not an identity. Each man and woman who experiences same-sex attractions is somebody’s son or daughter . . . We must not sell them out by making new laws or modifying religious doctrine” (347).
But Goldberg astutely shows us we will encounter other problems. “The question still remains: how do we handle the ‘self-declared homosexual’— the man or woman who has openly adopted a gay lifestyle, sees nothing wrong with what he or she is doing, and even goes around aggressively advertising his/her views?” In response he determines: “There is no reason why behavior disrespectful of the community should be tolerated just because the person doing the misbehaving happens to be gay. Clearly, the community of Torah-observant Jews has just as much right as any other to bar or expel those who would come to shul (synagogue) to scoff, to shock, or to provoke trouble. Moreover, little can be done, in the short term, for the militant homosexual who angrily rejects all efforts of outreach and reintegration.”
Goldberg adds: “It goes without saying that healing programs cannot coexist side-by-side with gay advocacy programs disguised as ‘diversity training.’ As now taught in the elementary, middle and high-school systems, several ‘diversity’ courses actually encourage students to experiment with homosexual acts, and even counsel them where to go for homosexual encounters.” He goes on: “Moreover, it should be obvious that a society that honors Torah-based sexual morality cannot support legislation that attempts to establish, or results in the establishment, of homosexuals as a special protected class. To enact special legislation legitimizes the unhealthy behavior of broken men and women in need of true love and understanding.” The author notes that one thing that is surely needed, then, on a society-wide scale, is education as to the causes of SSA and the importance of embracing one’s authentic male or female gender identity (352-3).
Still, Goldberg’s primary concern seems to rest with the same-sex attracted person’s relationship with
G-d. Homosexuality, in the faithful Jewish mind, is a sin that erodes this relationship more deeply and more radically than the more “ordinary transgressions.” Interestingly, Goldberg quotes Freud: “‘Homosexuality represents the acceptance of a neurotic resolution of conflict with the oedipal father in a way which will eventually distort one’s relation to the Heavenly Father.’ How this distortion or alienation develops can vary. It may manifest in anger and deliberate loss of emunah (faith in G-d) owing to an apparently unanswered plea for salvation. Or, it may involve recourse to intellectual sophistry in an attempt to ‘reinterpret’ the words of Torah and Talmud so as to make homosexuality appear consistent with G-d’s will” (354).
Someone said that an attempt to tidy up reality is to succumb to the sin of pride. This seems to be the case when it comes to the public embrace of the indulgent political correct homosexualism of the day. Where can one find the truth about the “grim realities” of homosexuality in a culture of people more interested in being cool, popular, and worldly than in standing for health, goodness, and rightness? Indeed, animosity against normalcy and against religion are nurtured in gay society (503). And the push for gay marriage is practically a hoax with only between 1% and 5% of gay couples actually tying the knot, and those numbers are dropping (504). Homosexualism today is not about marriage and family, rather it disparages the nuclear family ideal. It’s not about committed loving relationships, rather it is overwhelmingly and inordinately promiscuous and transient; the incentives for staying together are missing or illusory (519). It is not about reality, rather it mocks and harms the human body and its natural biological functions. The gay lifestyle is overwhelmingly and inordinately dangerous and life-shortening. Most especially, the innocence and safety of children are being sacrificed to this deceptive and false idol that has become the national taste.
One can find plenty of reality, uncomfortable as it may be, in this book. Rather than going through the gyrations required to squeeze shut the door of the crammed closet many young people are “coming out” of into a life of sexual disorientation and self-destruction, Goldberg allows the door to fall open and the tragic mess to fall out. Pulling the string attached to a 100-watt bulb, he shines the light on a jumbled mountain of human error and pain, the sorting and cleaning out of which he has found is prerequisite to a sparkling soul and a free life uncluttered with escapist addictions, suicidality, failed relationships, chronic illness, disease, and early death.
I’ll conclude with a success story in the words of one Jewish struggler who went through reorientation therapy and in the process discovered G-d and His timeless truths for all generations.
“Whereas I used to be totally preoccupied with my SSA issues, I am now more and more occupied with Torah—G-d’s design for creation—and His Teachings for mankind. I am now connected with an inexhaustible well of wisdom that makes a difference in how I live, what I do, and the meaning and significance of everything I encounter in life. And wow, what a difference it has made. I am not just saying this either – people have told me that they have seen me change significantly. (Yes, for the better!) The path He has lit and on which I travel is indeed a journey of discovery, learning, growing, and progressing."
Sol Subscriber on The O'Reilly Factor
Shannon Laudie, of Pleasant Grove, UT was highlighted on the Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor email segment Friday, December 9, 2011. Here's what she wrote in response to Margaret Hoover's take on Pamela Anderson disrespecting Mary in a Nativity Scene comedy sketch on TV:
"Margaret Hoover has a double standard. She wants children to respect gays, but believes Pamela Anderson's profane portrayal of the Virgin Mary is funny." Way to go, Shannon!
What's Happening at BYU? November 21, 2011
As alumni, parents of alumni, and active members of the LDS Church, up to now we at SoL have tried to refrain from reporting anything too negative about BYU or any other Church-affiliated organization or business. But as some concerned like-minded friends said the other day, “We’re over it.” So, here we go, come what may. We feel those who have invested in this institution and continue to support it, including financially, deserve to know what’s going on at BYU.
If you think BYU upholds traditional family values, think again. Certain department heads, professors, guest lecturers, and students have become a law unto themselves, regularly preaching all manner of progressivism including socialism, radical feminism, anti-Americanism, revisionist history, outdated Darwinism, and popular homosexualism, and continue to be supported, employed, and welcomed.
The issue of homosexuality is a prime example. Incredible and exasperating as it is, we must face the fact that our beloved and trusted BYU has made concessions, step by step, for homosexuality as an alternative sexual identity to be accepted and respected. This is reflected in the change BYU made to its Honor Code in 2007 (with input from gay activist students) which approved the accepting of openly gay instructors and students. Individuals acting out, however, is still prohibited, although the definition of acting out is open to interpretation, rationalization, and can easily be covered in secrecy. Even though the honor code still prohibits the advocating of homosexuality, advocating homosexuality is definitely happening. Of course all these problems are born of the compromising and soul-killing inconsistency of allowing homosexuality in principle but not in practice.
Just a few years ago in 2006 we publicly opposed the intrusion of the lawless traveling gay advocacy group Soulforce onto the BYU campus, with their flyers and posters. BYU allowed them that year, the next year they disallowed them and arrests were made. Interestingly, we don’t have to worry about Soulforce anymore because now BYU has a very vocal home-grown student advocacy group of its own called USGA, Understanding Same-Gender Attraction. It meets every Thursday night at 7:00 p.m. in room 111 of the TMCB on the BYU campus with BYU’s permission. Call this group what they will, from what we've seen firsthand, it’s really about affirming out-of-bounds sexual lust.
Not many know about the BYU’s counseling office’s invitation to a formerly LDS, ex-communicated acting-out gay man to train its counselors to help sexually confused students accept "their gayness." It was found out at the last minute by concerned Church members who complained, but the result was that the training was merely moved off campus. This was in February 2010.
Recent news concerned an openly gay man being fired as executive producer in BYU’s broadcasting department; BYU public relations was quick to make it clear that he was not fired because he was gay as some suggested. Is BYU that concerned about “bad publicity,” that is, being thought of as taking any kind of stand against homosexuality?
Most recently, the media reported student outrage about a series of letters supporting traditional values in The Daily Universe concerning gay parenting/adoption, prompted by the TV show “Modern Family.” A group of gay activist students who took especial offense to one letter to the editor made up an accusatory flyer and without permission stuffed a number of them in the next day’s edition. Joe Campbell, the managing editor of the paper, faculty member, and also a columnist for the Salt Lake Tribune, catered to the lawless gay activists by printing an apology and affirming the Church’s understanding and respect for homosexually-attracted people, at the same time removing the offending letter from the online version of The Daily Universe, a letter that unequivocally expressed the timeless Biblical truth that homosexuality is sinful. SoL wonders, what about the person who wrote the letter that got removed? There seems to be no understanding and respect for him – or the Bible for that matter. Shouldn’t he now be offended? Shouldn’t God be offended? Apparently not. To quote the Salt Lake Tribune article, “BYU has no interest in pursuing or punishing the students who produced or distributed the flyer, Campbell said. ‘We count this as a learning experience.’” And what has BYU learned? Never to publish scriptural doctrine in its paper because it might offend gay activists?
By the way, the only defense of the social experiment called gay parenting students could come up with was to compare it as better than foster homes, orphanages, and bad traditional parents. Besides having no information on which to base this comparison, and besides respectable foster parents, honorable orphanages, and imperfect but striving traditional parents rightly taking umbrage at this comparison, the issue is not about comparing these situations. The issue is that gay parents are modeling sinful and highly harmful and risky sexual ideas and behaviors to innocent, untaught children. Everybody needs to read Dawn Stefanowicz’s book, Out From Under, The Impact of Homosexual Parenting and hear her highly-researched presentation, to name but one of many resources of reality and truth.
What is going on at BYU is incongruent and inexplicable. Unless we are instructed to turn in our Standard Works for new gay-affirming scriptures and clean out our ward and home library shelves of all our LDS Church manuals, books, and magazines, homosexuality should still be officially, courageously, and correctly shown as sinful and harmful in both thought and deed in every ward, stake, and Church-owned or endorsed group, business, or education entity.
For those of us who attended BYU, dated and became engaged on its campus, sent our children to be educated there and hoped to send our grandchildren, these developments feel like a gross and incomprehensible betrayal. Gone are the days of visiting this beautiful, memory-laden place with a warm, light heart, feeling as if it were indeed the Lord’s university, and having confidence in it as a fearless source of spreading goodness, knowledge, truth, and righteousness.
The gay activists continue their work and grow in boldness. Why aren't those who are obligated to stand for truth and righteousness at all times, in all things, and in all places vocal as well? At the very least, as things stand, you may want to think again about making that regular financial contribution to BYU.
--Stephen and Janice Graham, Standard of Liberty
The Pursuit of Happiness and the Fatal Principle
Our Declaration of Independence says that we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But should people have a right to pursue their personal idea of happiness by any and every means? Of course not. Our society has all kinds of restrictions and outlaws a number of behaviors such as rape, murder, stealing, etc. The writers of the Declaration on which our country is founded meant that all people have the right to pursue happiness by lawful and moral means. It was written in a time when people were permanently divided and oppressed according to unchangeable class or social status, ruler-mandated religious denominations, and the like. Perhaps it's hard for us complacent, multi-generational Americans to imagine such a time when people did not enjoy such things as social mobility, property ownership, and religious freedom. Evidently, it was a very big deal to conceive of a such a nation as this was meant to be. The Founders wanted a different sort of society where everyone was equally free to pursue virtuous goals and worship God according to the dictates of a moral conscience.
Jan Lewis in The Pursuit of Happiness, explains that in using this phrase America's Founders actually had in mind not the fulfillment of the individual as we hear about today, but the fulfillment of family life as the ultimate wished-for personal happiness. This included the freedom to pass on one's moral/religious convictions to one's children and the opportunity for property ownership (acres for a house, garden, animals, pond, etc.) in order to independently provide for the spiritual and physical needs of a growing family. In those days owning a house was not considered for its own sake as a financial investment as it often is today, but for the sake of long-term conjugal family security. At its core the Declaration was meant to proclaim the human right to pursue the best safeguard against tyranny and the best chance for human happiness possible here on earth: family life.
Increasingly, since the 1920s, the original meaning of the pursuit of happiness has been redefined, even high-jacked, to include unlimited sexuality, the opposite of virtuous family life. We've seen how co-habitation, out-of wedlock pregnancy, divorce, abortion, homosexuality and the like, have become de-stigmatized, then championed, all in the name of individual sexual freedom, fulfillment, or happiness.
Of course licentiousness does not bring happiness, only misery, but we live in a blind and prideful society which values only itself and has abandoned its responsibilities to both past and future generations. Sexuality is now the one impulse that need not be bridled---except perhaps where it is associated with marriage, ecclesiastical discipline, and sex crimes, and even these restrictions are fast fading away. We have rampant infidelity, open marriages, state-recognized "gay marriage," churches softening and abandoning their doctrines, a growing gay clergy, and new laws and policies, local, state, and federal, reflecting ever-widening boundaries for all manner of sex and sexuality for all ages.
In the 1940s C. S. Lewis, in his essay "We Have No 'Right' to Happiness,'" (God in the Dock) discusses this societal trend, adding, "Our sexual impulses are thus being put in a position of preposterous privilege. The sexual motive is taken to condone all sorts of behaviour which, if it had any other end in view, would be condemned as merciless, treacherous and unjust." He is right. If our society did not embrace irresponsible sexual freedom as happiness, but rather the pursuit of classic family life as happiness, a "gay" man's abandonment of his wife and children, an adulterous woman's convenience abortion, a public school teaching children that homosexuality is normal and having a father who objects arrested, a little boy being encouraged by the adults around him to dress and act as a girl in preparation for hormones and surgeries that will confuse and mutilate his healthy young body, and many other behaviors, would not be condoned as they now are, but summarily condemned as merciless, treacherous, and unjust.
Now that we have made the sexual impulse a "right," this fatal principle, as Lewis calls it, "must sooner or later seep through our whole lives. We thus advance toward a society in which not only each man but every [unschooled and selfish] impulse in each man claims carte blanche. And then . . . our civilization will have died at heart and will . . . be swept away."
So much has happened which Lewis could hardly have imagined, but he clearly saw the direction the world was headed. It's incredible to us at SoL that even those with resources, influence, and obligation avoid this topic like the plague. Many of our seemingly most moral and conservative leaders no longer take a stand on issues of sexual morality. They, quite irresponsibly, turn a blind eye to the tragic consequences for a society bent on sex, sex, and more sex. As a result, Lewis's prediction is coming true. To its detriment, as our society has settled on pushing and celebrating unlimited sexuality it has had no trouble pushing and celebrating every other preposterous entitlement men arbitrarily claim from society as a right: a "right" to marriage, a "right" to be a parent, a "right" to destroy the unborn, a "right" to own a house, a "right" to have a job, a "right" to free health care, a "right" for foreigners to break America’s laws, and the list goes on. So much for the sense of personal responsibility needed to pursue real happiness.
How Does Our Garden Grow?
Review on A Queer Thing Happened to America, Michael L. Brown, EqualTime Books, 2011
by Janice Graham. September 17, 2011.
Is it any wonder that, hidden among and sheltered under the unruly weeds of the anti-establishment sexual liberation of the 1960s, up popped the stubborn and ligneous homosexualism crusade? Anyone knows that when even the most carefully planted vegetable garden is neglected it is quickly taken over by the uncultivated and inedible, even poisonous. Inevitably, that which is at least unproductive and at worst harmful will steal essential light, nutrients, and room to grow, killing the thoughtfully sown useful and productive plants. As Michael Brown repeats in his brave new book about this crazy jungle of a world we find ourselves living in, You think I’m making this up? You think I’m exaggerating? Well, I’m not. Read on. And as distressing, disturbing, and recondite as the little-known facts are in this hefty 600-page volume (including a hundred pages more of tiny-print notes and references), read on is what we must do, that is, if we care at all about the state of our shared societal garden.
Before we begin let’s shed some light on the importance and purpose of civilized human societies. Like a good garden, a good society is productive and beneficial to its people. When human beings form the best and most free societies, as in a family, neighborhood, community, church, and nation, each member willingly gives away some of his freedoms, especially those time-tested and proven to be destructive and harmful to himself and others. In return, the individual receives a myriad of benefits only a good society can provide, including safety, convenience, healthy boundaries, guidance, and a sense of place and purpose. Unfortunately, in America’s recent decades we have seen more and more of an emphasis on the individual’s basest, most self-centered freedoms and less and less on the lofty standards and great value of the best possible society. In fact, radical individualism is killing the garden, strangling the most fundamental units of free societies beginning with the family and the church. For instance, in our modern courts and legislatures, by whatever misguided or nefarious motivations, gluttonous and unchecked sexuality is now being favored over respect for life, childhood innocence, the conjugal family, religious freedom, and decency. When our society’s most carefully-sown seeds are thus oppressed, we open ourselves up to weakness and destruction from within and from without.
Is it true that faith, family, and freedom are endangered by some evil force in our society today? And if so, how did this happen? In A Queer Thing Michael Brown explains in no uncertain terms and with many a welcome reiteration and clarification (needed because the incredulous reader will often think his eyes and brain are playing tricks on him), how we got where we are, pro-gay ideology, the impact of gay activism on society, and where the current trajectory is taking us. One close-to-home illustration is Brown’s own experience in trying to find a publisher for this book, and finding instead that, in the words of a media pundit, conservative no less, “no media is willing to promote a book that opposes homosexuality” (10).
Unlike common weeds that spring up voluntarily in a neglected garden, we learn in this book that the seeds of this particular vice have been as carefully sown as the seeds of virtues must be, and all while the gardener slept. In chapter one, “A Stealth Agenda,” Brown reveals numerous documents, manifestos, articles, books, mission statements, task forces, training programs, policy institutes, conferences, demonstrations, campaigns, and national programs for schools which have been created over the years by dozens of highly funded gay activist organizations in the cause of legitimizing homosexuality. For a very small percentage of America’s population (2 %), their stated objectives are exceedingly self-important and presumptuous: overhaul straight America, encourage coming out, expunge scripture, punish objectors, repeal age of consent laws, allow same-sex marriage or abolish marriage altogether, free the homosexual in everyone, create a new reality in America. Create a new America? For the other 98% of us? In the often quoted words of the former legal director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, “Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. . . . Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process transforming the very fabric of society” (37). Using the manipulation and amelioration of language, gay activism in its own words aims to “desensitize”, “jam” (smear the opposition), and ‘convert” (311).
The reader may not have known it before because of its underhanded quality, but he will know it now; there is a gay agenda with a widespread clear and consistent message: gay is good, in fact it’s actually best. Traditional morality is out. Sex is the new god. The Bible must be rewritten, or at least reinterpreted to be sexual, more particularly, homosexual (chapter 10, “Queer Theology”). What’s more, the rights of gays are more important than anyone else’s. Absolutely nothing opposing homosexuality will be allowed. In Brown’s words, the rule of thumb for gay rights is: “We have the right to be ourselves, even if it offends you, but you do not have the right to be yourselves or to be offended. And under no circumstances do you have the right to offend us” (47). (For those who think gay is good, read Larry Kramer’s own words on his depraved sex life, page 136, words from a man whose name is memorialized at Yale University.)
As for the hate we hear so much about, Brown’s research concludes that most of the hate is coming from the GLBT community itself. Another of their goals is to make anyone opposing homosexuality look bad, which has amounted to persecution in the form of vicious name-calling, crass speech, and character defamation (62). Indeed, the tolerance we are told is required is no longer enough. The “Riddle Homophobic Scale” defines homophobia as “repulsion, pity, tolerance, and acceptance.” Only when people “support, admire, appreciate, and nurture” will they earn exemption from the so-called “homophobia” label (117).
Having made great progress in gaining mainstream acceptance, the intolerance and insanity that is gay activism pushes on into private businesses, schools, and churches. Most people may not know that businesses are rated by the Human Rights Campaign, the foremost gay activist group in the nation, on how gay-affirming they are according to truly outrageous criteria. (Brown correctly points out that it is really the Homosexual Rights Campaign because it is not about everybody’s rights, only homosexuals’.) In chapter eight the author supplies a long, long list of HRC’s gay-friendliest corporations, companies so ubiquitous that it would be virtually impossible for the public to avoid patronage, including Nike, Disney, IBM, Costco, Sears, and Microsoft.
What most people don’t realize is that gay activism targets school children. The grab for kids over the heads of their parents is perhaps gay activism’s most insidious and hurtful tactic. Brown says the average age of coming out is now 10 for boys and 12 for girls (106), all because at school the male/female reality is being deconstructed while children are being indoctrinated and encouraged toward all manner of gayness. He gives a long list of elementary schools books promoting sex, the sexualization of children, and the normalization of homosexual as equal to heterosexual relationships (108). Now we have kindergarten boys dressed as girls. Girls using the boys’ locker room. School kids instructed to play at being homosexuals in skits.
What are being presented as anti-bullying, nondiscrimination campaigns in our schools, from pre-school to college, such as intrusive questionnaires about all manner of sexual behavior, gay clubs, Day of Silence, and Gaypril, is really pro-gay, all about affirmation, encouragement, and celebration of homosexuality. In top universities there are campus orgies, queer textbooks, queer proms, gayborhood clubs, drag shows, drag balls, queer film festivals, and queer conferences, not to mention what’s happening on internet social networks. And all this is sanctioned by teachers and administrators, authority figures kids trust and look to for truth, knowledge, and guidance.
Of course everyone should know by now that Hollywood is overwhelmingly gay-affirming. As Elizabeth Taylor put it, “If it weren’t for gays, honey, there wouldn’t be a Hollywood” (152). Brown takes us on a revealing tour of this once decent city that plays its own ginormous role in shaping our culture, showing how movies and TV have come to be a force for pushing acceptance of wayward and excessive sexual appetites. Thanks to Hollywood gay activism, the rising generation increasingly regards gayness as hip, fun, cool, and everywhere. It becomes obvious to this reader that homosexual behavior and the like has become just another tragic way, akin to smoking, drinking, drugs, and heterosexual acting-out, for naturally rebellious teens to proclaim their independence from or lash out at the established rules of their parents, religion, and society, or for insecure, harassed teens to escape the risk and heartbreak of failure with the opposite sex. Sadly, such youth are aided in this highly addictive debauchery by omnipresent techno-porn and readily embraced by the gay community, never told that this bout with out-of-bounds sexual thoughts, feelings, and experimentation could be a passing phase, or that sex addictions have tragic consequences.
A chapter called “Is Gay the New Black?” is particularly astute. Brown, while bending over backwards to show love and concern for people with homosexual tendencies, tackles the tired and unproven but still often believed born-that-way argument. Showing that science has not found a genetic gay factor, he goes on to point out that this argument is irrelevant, reminding us that biology offers no help in distinguishing between right and wrong. He quotes Dr. Richard Lewonin, “Cancer is biological; does that make cancer good?” (220) Writes Brown, “Only people, guided by values and beliefs, can decide what is moral and immoral” (224). And if there were a genetic cause for homosexuality, a circumstance people are constantly insisting is so difficult, Brown asks, wouldn’t we want to find a genetic cure, as in the case of diabetes?
In perhaps the most disturbing chapter to me, “Speaking of the Unspeakable,” Brown systematically proves that the exact same arguments put forward by activists promoting homosexualism in order to justify their sexual behaviors are being put forth by organized pedophiles and pederasts. And the dirty little secret gay activists don’t like to talk about is that all the famous homosexuals they claim from history to further their cause were actually pederasts. Whether this was part of the plan or not, the gay movement has paved the way for public legitimization of what is called “consensual child-adult sex.” You think Brown is making this up? He reports that in the Netherlands an open pedophile was recently elected to parliament and knighted. In Dublin in 1984 a “Gay Youth Conference” created resolutions to abolish all age of consent laws. To paraphrase Dostoevsky, once God and His objective, age-old standards for goodness are removed from the equation (as occurred with the onset of the sexual liberation movement — the free-love hippies used the same arguments, too), all is permitted. Talk about our neglected garden overgrown by frightful weeds!
Brown devotes one important chapter to little-known but indisputable facts about how gay activism has compromised and stifled scientific research and debate, even psychiatric treatment, including showing how the American Psychiatric Association came to remove homosexuality from its manual of disorders because of political pressure from gay groups. Another chapter champions the existence of thousands of ex-gays and the real and present possibility of overcoming unwanted homosexuality. Brown goes on to explain how and why this possibility is vehemently denied by the gay community. Of course. They know that if one homosexual person can reorient to heterosexuality, people will realize gayness is not immutable, and as such is not a bone fide minority group, and the entire gay movement falls apart.
Of great interest should be the author’s findings on the part government is playing in the sexual freedom versus freedom of conscience battle. Evidently, religion has lost the culture war and Big Brother has gone militantly gay. After all, the two views are obviously incompatible, given the in-your-face intolerance shown by the gay movement, therefore, to reference Robert Bork, one will be supported and the other harmed. Bringing to mind the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition or the Nazi regime, Brown cites incidents that show how those with views opposing homosexuality in any way are being marginalized, silenced, and punished— in schools and universities, in workplaces, and, I might add if Brown didn’t, in churches (with increasingly gay, pro-gay, or misled and complacent membership and clergy). Even church-run charity organizations (such as Boston’s Catholic adoption service that refused to relinquish children to gay couples) and private conversations are not immune, and this is happening around the world. Gay speech is protected, while Christian speech is forbidden, even demonized. “Fellow, Americans,” writes Brown, “this is coming our way and to a large extent it is already here” (537). He says we must “expect to be harassed, fired, interrogated, fined, jailed, and attacked” for actively holding traditional views that benefit, order, and protect human society, namely, that “Marriage is the union of a man and a woman only,” “It’s best for a child to be raised by his or her own mother and father” or “I believe that homosexual practice is wrong”(546).
But that’s not nearly all, as Brown says so many times throughout this big book. Imagine a “transgender” telling first graders how his penis was cut off and he became a woman. It happened. Enter the world of “trannies,” people who have decided they are not the sex God made them, who take hormones and get doctors to mutilate their healthy bodies so they can better try to fool themselves and others that they are someone other than they really are as irrevocably shown in their DNA. We could call this the newest, hairiest weed popping up in our society. Yes, reports Brown, we now have little boys officially deemed little girls, children being given puberty hormone blockers until they are ready for “sex change surgery” at age 16, husbands and wives who “trade sexes,” and children being forced to recognize that their dad has “become a woman.” Imagine this true scenario: Your father changed into your mother and your real mother is her lover. But your real mother doesn’t like your father being a woman or a mother after all and neither do you, and your mother isn’t a lesbian so your parents don’t love each other anymore.
In fact, yours truly may have seen a “transitioning” she-he at the gym the other day. Hair that could be either, a woman’s face and voice, shoulder tattoos, exaggeratedly loose hangy male clothes, a strangely unnatural looking too-flat chest, and lifting the same weights as her-his solicitous and obviously female friend in a skirt whom the she-he did not follow into the women’s locker room. There in the gym, seeing my obviously female self reflected in the mirror companioned with my obviously male husband, a freaky, science-fictiony thought occurred to me: could there come a day when androgyny is the rule, when we are not allowed to present ourselves as either sex, when seeing an obviously male person and an obviously female person holding hands is a thing of the past? In the wake of happening upon a bold she-he working out alongside us at our gym, my husband and I, together as an opposite-sex, married, loving couple suddenly seemed like an old-fashioned custom, on its way out.
Should this ridiculous and disturbing thought of mine be in any way taken seriously? Yes. Brown shows us beyond a doubt that along with the gay alphabet soup, we are now being treated to the much more open-ended and far-reaching term “queer.” With queerness comes the notion of eradicating the binary male/female gender reality altogether, and this inevitably translates into multiplying gender exponentially as if the two sexes have exploded into scattered fragments. Yes, it sounds like science fiction to most people, but these outrageous fabrications, which include sadism and masochism, are being treated as normal, natural, and legitimate in some aspects of mainstream society, just as the political gay fabrication has been for some time now. They include so many contortions of human gender identities and relationships that you might have to draw a diagram of stick figures to figure out what they mean or where they came from. Chaos is the only word to describe it.
After a sickening report on how the perversely sexually addicted have even mainstreamed a homoeroticized Christ and the Bible, Brown finally takes us into the debased and bizarre sub-culture of voluntary amputees, those who feel they shouldn’t have been born with certain limbs and actually find some doctor who will remove, say, their perfectly healthy legs at the knee. For the reader it is not difficult to see that this is the same sex-crazed insanity as Chinese feet-binding and removing healthy breasts and genitalia. Believe it or not, some people are turned on by anything and everything, the kinkier the better, and for sex worshipers, the kinkiness has no limit.
As G.K Chesterton said a hundred years ago, "All healthy men, ancient and modern, know there is a certain fury in sex that we cannot afford to inflame, and that a certain mystery and awe must ever surround it if we are to remain sane." To borrow from George Orwell, this is why societies must preserve fairly strict rules for sexual behavior, even if some people refuse to keep those rules. As much as decent people would dearly prefer to continue turning a blind eye, we must see that all the deviations from order, normalcy, and health Brown cites are Godless, sexual, evil, and addictive at their roots, are increasing, and will affect bystanders, that is, our children, our families, our lives.
With the our society-wide surrender to homosexuality, Brown tells us, “the new possibilities are endless as are the new problems” (572). That’s right and we can’t even imagine the tragedies and disorder that will inevitably stem from limitless sex and sexuality left uncontested. It struck me that even most gay activists, if they thought it through, would not want the world they are fighting for, for every human in every stage of development, and every human relationship, can and will be sexualized; goodness, the only force able to stop the evil, will have been beaten into blind submission. In a final call for sanity, the author concludes with the understatements, “There is something precious about the male-female distinctives” (579). And “The very foundations of human society are undermined once we deviate from the foundational path of male and female” (563).
So, if we Americans want this garden we call human society to flourish, what must we do? Michael Brown, with his tireless documentation of America’s dark, queer, tangled experiment and the horrors it has already engendered, makes a good solid case for a consistent and uncompromising return to God’s benevolent law for his children concerning the sexual desire. This is that sex and sexuality should be uniquely reserved for lawful marriage and healthy, wholesome relations between natural male and natural female, husband and wife. Considering the state of our society today, this would require a complete recultivation, digging out the noxious weeds, preparing the soil, and planting anew the timeless seeds of virtue.
Don't Let Your Kids Watch Chaz Bono On 'Dancing With the Stars'
Chaz Bono, the “transsexual” woman who underwent plastic surgery and takes male hormones in an effort to appear to be a man, and who asserts she is a man, will appear on the upcoming season of "Dancing with the Stars", according to ABC, the network which airs the show. He will be partnered with a woman.
Casting Chaz Bono on "Dancing with the Stars" is part of Chaz’s victory tour, which has included appearances on talk shows and the release of a book called "Transition."
I advise parents to not allow their children to watch the episodes in which Chaz appears.
Here’s why: Many of the children who might be watching will be establishing a sense of self which includes, of course, a sexual/gender identity. Some will be girls becoming comfortable with dramatic changes in their bodies. Some will be boys coming to terms with integrating the dawn of manhood with exquisite feelings of vulnerability. Young viewers will include tomboyish girls and sensitive, less stereotypically “masculine” boys. They will also include children who have sustained the losses of loved ones and are wrestling with depression, perhaps wondering who they are absent their deceased mothers or fathers.
The last thing vulnerable children and adolescents need, as they wrestle with the normal process of establishing their identities, is to watch a captive crowd in a studio audience applaud on cue for someone whose search for an identity culminated with the removal of her breasts, the injection of steroids and, perhaps one day soon, the fashioning of a make-shift phallus to replace her vagina.
It is a toxic and unnecessary byproduct of the tragic celebration of transgender surgery that millions of young people who do watch "Dancing with the Stars" will have to ponder this question: Maybe my problems really stem from the fact that I’m a girl inside a boy’s body (or a boy inside a girls body). Maybe I’m not a tomboy; I’m just a boy! Maybe I’m not just being bullied because I’m a sensitive, reflective young man interested in flowers, not football. Maybe I’m not just uncertain about my sexuality. Maybe I’m a girl! Maybe all this angst and suffering I’m feeling as I emerge into puberty and pass through it isn’t just because I’m changing, but because I should change completely—and have my breasts removed or my penis amputated!
It would be wrong to think that gender dysphoria cannot be kindled by celebrating those who have undergone sexual reassignment surgery. Human beings do model one another—in terms of emotion, thought and behavior. By broadcasting, applauding and mainstreaming the journey of a very disordered person who endured, and likely will continue to endure, real suffering based on extraordinarily deep psychological problems, we suggest that that journey is a smart—even heroic—one to take.
The truth is that Chaz Bono should be empathized with and treated with dignity. Any contribution he makes to the world should be applauded as it would be for any other person.
But Chaz Bono should not be applauded for asserting she is a man (and goes about trying to look like one) any more than a woman who believes she will be happier without arms, has them removed and then continues to assert that she was right all along—her self-concept was that of a double amputee. Now, all is well.
Chaz Bono should not be applauded any more than someone who, tragically, believes that his species, rather than gender, is what is amiss and asks a plastic surgeon to build him a tail of flesh harvested from his abdomen. If only a plastic surgeon would acquiesce, all would be well.
There are such people, by the way. Do you want them exalted, too, rather than commiserated with? Do you want your children thinking that if they suffer a delusion that they are better off without arms, that that means they should visit a plastic surgeon? Or would you prefer that they burrow to the psychological core of their abnormal psychology with an empathic professional, or two or three—even if that exploration is long and arduous? Would you not prefer that they try every available medication to impact mood, thought and perception before going under the knife?
It would be wrong to think that gender dysphoria—discomfort with one’s gender—must always end either in misery or sexual reassignment surgery. It can end with coming to terms with deep psychological conflicts that are fueling the gender dysphoria.
"Dancing with the Stars", starring Chaz Bono, takes the opposite view. It’s position is that Chaz Bono’s chemically and surgically altered appearance is a blessing to us all, a triumph of autonomy and self-possession on par with the triumphs achieved by the heroes of the Civil Rights movement.
That’s very nearly insane. It’s a psychologically destructive myth and can erode our children’s evolving senses of self.
I’m going to take heat for saying all this, by the way. I already have for making similar statements in the past. So be it. I would rather be the one shouting “The Emperor has no clothes!” than one of the happy-go-lucky villagers applauding the tragic parade.
Make no mistake: I would have gone to the ends of the earth to help Chaz Bono if she had come to me for help.
I would have treated her with dignity and summoned every ounce of my intellect and empathy to explore her psyche with her. I would have pried loose every family secret hidden by the Bonos.
I would have been relentless.
I would have used everything I know about medication to help her.
I would have enlisted the help of every expert I know—some of the world’s best—at everything from endocrinology to hypnosis.
I would have teamed up with a spiritual counselor, if that seemed indicated.
And if all that failed, and if Chaz Bono wanted either to kill herself or to undergo gender reassignment surgery, I would have taken that journey with her, too. I would have talked her parents through the hell of it. We would make the best of it.
Somehow, with enormous compassion and love and God’s help, we would get through it.
But I would feel no triumph in it, no sense of any heroic overcoming obstacles and righting the flesh in accordance with the soul. I would feel pathos. I would feel the limits of my attempts to truly heal Chaz Bono, and I would wish her well with a life that had veered, seemingly unavoidably, into a very dark place.
Chaz Bono didn’t come to me for help, though. She didn’t ask me for my opinion. But when she decided to promote gender reassignment surgery in the media as a happy triumph, she ended up getting my attention, anyhow. Because I care about you, too, and your families.
So, here it is. One psychiatrist’s prescription, sure to cost me a lot of hate mail, but reward me with the certainty that I am stating what I believe to be true and that I am doing my job: If you care about your kids, don’t let them watch "Dancing with the Stars" starring Chaz Bono.
Captain of My Soul, by Aaron S. Grant Available NOW! August 1, 2011
With a Foreword by Jeff Robinson, Ph.D. and an Afterword by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.
Reports from Readers:
This is an excellent book.
I couldn't put it down - I kept reading and reading and reading.
This book should be in the home of every family.
I read it in one sitting!
As a college professor, I have students who struggle with this problem. This book offers hope. It's disheartening, all the false information being put out. The truth needs to be told.
Tidal Wave Books, along with the Standard of Liberty, is pleased to announce the publication of a bravely revealed and important true story. Battle lines are drawn in an LDS setting as from a young man's own words we learn the reality of early experiences with peer abuse, same-sex internet pornography, a gay-affirming culture, and online associations with predatory men, conditions which can send developing masculinity and sexuality into confusion and addiction.
How is our secularized and sexually permissive environment
shaping the lives of young people?
What role does each of us play in their increasing decisions to
turn to pornography and homosexuality?
Here is a riveting true life experience
that reveals stunning answers.
Snippets of what experts have to say about Captain of My Soul:
"The condition of same-sex identity is definitely treatable. Your book would be a great resource."
-W. Dean Belnap, M. D., Psychiatrist
"Here's a success story."
-Douglas E. Brinley, Author, Brigham Young University Professor (ret.), Lecturer
"Aaron's story is not one of quiet desperation, but one of quiet celebration."
-A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH, University of Utah School of Medicine
"This is the clear account of love from a family and much greater love from Jesus Christ."
-Dr. Neil E. Whitehead, Ph.D., Author, My Genes Made Me Do It, A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation
Here is truth about
youth, pornography, and homosexuality
that is being overlooked, ignored, and silenced
by a complacent, conditioned,
and dangerously compromised culture.
This is the story of a modern fall and a timeless redemption, with key roles played by a loving family, knowledge and education, gospel-based professional counseling, and unconquerable faith in the saving grace of Jesus Christ.
Captain of My Soul may be ordered on www.tidalwavebooks.com now for 12.95, free shipping. It will be available soon on Amazon.com and BarnesAndNoble.com. Also find Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality for LDS families, Wild Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality for all Christian families, and Me, Tarzan, You Jane for the youngest children written for all Christian families, also at Tidal Wave Books, BYU Bookstore, through Barnes and Noble and amazon.com.
We recently received the following two items from our friends at NARTH (the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), about recent attacks by gay activists about offering reorientation therapy for those with unwanted homosexual attractions.
As the linked article suggests, the attacks on those who offer assistance to clients struggling with unwanted homosexual attractions is growing daily. In just the past few weeks CNN had an extensive series of reports that sent the message to viewers that attempts to reorient homosexuality are unsafe and universally unsuccessful. Therapists who are willing to help these individuals were portrayed as frauds, and even more concerning, dangerous. Fortunately, the CNN report (though unbalanced) did include Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, one of NARTH's founding directors, who very articulately offered an opposing and scientifically accurate viewpoint.
Presidential politics will now apparently be used as a forum to attack change therapies. Dr. Marcus Bachman, for example, and candidates like former Governor Tim Pawlenty are under fire in the press. Both have pointed out that although homosexual feelings may not be a choice, they are also not genetically determinative, and cannot be used as a justification to push a political agenda. As the debate continues we can be sure that science will be generally ignored if we are unwilling to speak out and speak up.
NARTH does not intend to let that happen and we need your help to make sure our neighbors, families, friends, and the leaders of our civic institutions are not misled.
We believe the reason reorientation therapies are under attack is because the campaign to deceive society into believing that people are "born that way" is beginning to fail. The science won't support the rhetoric, and even the American Psychological Association has had to modify their position to reflect the research. The small but persistent voice of NARTH members and our allies has made a difference.
Now the new assault on science comes in the form of the equally fallacious argument that attempts to help those with unwanted homosexuality are "dangerous". This is completely false! This is particularly exasperating coming from a media totally unwilling to acknowledge the tremendous health and emotional toll that homosexual activities exact on those caught up in the lifestyle. They will spend thousands of hours searching for one individual who claims to have been injured by therapy, but seldom mention the thousands of broken lives that are the legacy of homosexual behavior.
At the same time, the number of individuals who have successfully overcome homosexuality continues to grow, and the lives of these brave folks continue to testify that change is possible. Please know that while we continue to plead for your financial support, NARTH members, supporters, and friends are making a difference! By making a generous donation we can and will do more. Thank you for your encouragement.
In the past week presidential candidate Congresswoman Michelle Bachman has been attacked because her husband, psychologist Marcus Bachman, allegedly does "reparative therapy" for those who come to his Christian counseling clinic seeking assistance with unwanted homosexuality. Almost simultaneously former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty was asked in an interview if he thought homosexuality was a choice. Both campaigns reacted with statements that mirror information familiar to NARTH members and supporters.
In short, they responded that counseling clients have a right to seek assistance for their unwanted homosexual attractions and science does not support the "born that way" mantra used to promote the gay political agenda.
In recent years, people have tried to marginalize therapists who provide psychological care for clients distressed by unwanted homosexual attractions; yet, change therapies have been offered for the past century and have been found to be successful. In fact, over the past 125 years, change of sexual orientation has been documented via case studies, clinical reports, and research studies (NARTH, 2009). It is clear that change of both behavior and attractions is indeed possible.
Although many people have been misled to believe that homosexuality is biologically based and therefore unchangeable, researchers acknowledge that people are not simply born homosexual. Researchers have never found a biological basis for homosexuality (APA, 2008). Anyone familiar with the research knows clearly that many factors contribute to sexual orientation. There are many pathways into and out of homosexuality.
Therapy for unwanted homosexual attractions is no different than therapy for any other issue. Therapists who offer psychological care for clients distressed by homosexual attractions typically offer mainstream approaches to therapy. Approaches to therapy include Interpersonal Therapy, Object Relations Therapy, Psychodynamic Therapy, Cognitive Therapy, Family Therapy, EMDR, trauma-based therapies, and others. NARTH therapists are fully licensed professionals who represent the major mental health organizations and who abide by the highest standards of ethical care.
NARTH supports the freedom of individuals to claim a homosexual identity or to explore their unwanted attractions and make changes in their lives. Clients have the right to self-determination. Ethically, therapists must honor the client's right to choose his or her own goals, or the therapist must refer to another therapist who can do so. Ethical therapists support their clients in achieving their stated goals, including goals to move beyond a homosexual orientation.
NARTH supports the rights of clients to pursue psychological care for unwanted homosexual attractions and the rights of professionally qualified individuals to provide such care. Those candidates in the public spotlight, and it will get far more intense as we get closer to election-day, are to be congratulated for sticking to the science and supporting client rights no matter how politically incorrect it is to defend truth and freedom regarding homosexuality.
American Psychological Association (APA) Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns (2008). Answers to your questions for a better understanding of sexual orientation & homosexuality. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/sorientation.pdf.
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) Scientific Advisory Committee (2009). What research shows: NARTH's response to the American Psychological Association's (APA) claims on homosexuality. Journal of Human Sexuality, 1, 1-128.
Click here to go to the NARTH website.
New book, Captain of My Soul, by Aaron S. Grant Release date August 1, 2011 With a Foreword by Jeff Robinson, Ph.D. and an Afterword by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.
Tidal Wave Books, along with the Standard of Liberty, is pleased to announce the publication of a bravely revealed and important true story. Battle lines are drawn in an LDS setting as from a young man’s own words we learn the reality of early experiences with peer abuse, same-sex internet pornography, a gay-affirming culture, and online associations with predatory men, conditions which can send developing masculinity and sexuality into confusion and addiction.
How is our secularized
and sexually permissive environment
shaping the lives of young people?
What role does each of us play in their increasing decisions to
turn to pornography and homosexuality?
Here is a riveting true life experience
that reveals stunning answers.
Snippets of what experts have to say about Captain of My Soul:
“The condition of same-sex identity is definitely treatable. Your book would be a great resource.”
—W. Dean Belnap, M. D., Psychiatrist
“Here’s a success story.”
—Douglas E. Brinley, Author, Brigham Young University Professor (ret.), Lecturer
“Aaron’s story is not one of quiet desperation, but one of quiet celebration.”
—A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH, University of Utah School of Medicine
“This is the clear account of love from a family and much greater love from Jesus Christ.”
—Dr. Neil E. Whitehead, Ph.D., Author, My Genes Made Me Do It, A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation
Here is truth about
youth, pornography, and homosexuality
that is being overlooked, ignored, and silenced
by a complacent, conditioned,
and dangerously compromised culture.
This is the story of a modern fall and a timeless redemption, with key roles played by a loving family, knowledge and education, gospel-based professional counseling, and unconquerable faith in the saving grace of Jesus Christ.
Captain of My Soul may be ordered on www.tidalwavebooks.com now for 12.95, free shipping. Also find Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality for LDS families, Wild Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality for all Christian families, and Me, Tarzan, You Jane for the youngest children written for all Christian families, also at Tidal Wave Books, BYU Bookstore, through Barnes and Noble and amazon.com.
We can learn a lot about gay activism by who they attack and why. Incredibly, some still openly deny the existence of a gay agenda, scoffing at the very idea. But of course there is a gay agenda. We see it playing out in our government, schools, entertainment media, and culture at large.
One of the latest tactics in this agenda is attacking and misrepresenting presidential candidate Michelle Bachman because of her traditional, Biblical stance on human sexuality and her husband’s occupation as a clinical therapist who helps people with unwanted homosexual tendencies orient to heterosexuality. Of course gay activists deny this is even possible, ignoring and mocking credible research that proves success for thousands of people.
Bear in mind that this is the group that screams for diversity, for tolerance and acceptance of alternative points of view, at the same time screaming conformity, intolerance and hatred for those who hold beliefs opposite from theirs. This is the group that would deny an individual the right to approach Marcus Bachmann with the plea: I’m miserable. I’m sick. I want out of this homosexual lifestyle. It doesn’t feel right. Can you help me? I’m ready to change. Why? Because if it’s a choice, gayness, with all its political and cultural influence, is toast.
It’s awfully convenient how the growing popular opinion, especially since the 1960s, is that human beings are able to change their minds on just about anything BUT sexuality.
Let’s pray Michelle and Marcus Bachmann hold their own.
SoL Subscriber Leaves Wells Fargo Over Support of Gay Activists
A few weeks ago SoL highlighted the activities associated with the Gay Pride celebration in Salt Lake City. We included a letter from one of our subscribers to Wells Fargo Bank, in which he expressed his disappointment with the bank for its support of the homosexual activist movement. This prompted other subscribers to take action as well. Below is a letter written by SoL husband/wife subscribers to the manager of their local branch. Letters and phone calls are just two of the ways all of us can take a stand for our traditional, God-based values, and against the subversion of those values. We encourage you to consider what you can do. All that is needed for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.
Dear Mr. -----,
Thank you for taking the time to visit with us in regard to our concern over the recent participation of Wells Fargo in the Utah Pride Parade in Salt Lake City. As we expressed, at the time, we were very disappointed that our bank would have an entry in a parade whose major, if not sole, purpose was to state their preference as to a sexual partner.
We believe that every individual has the right to equal treatment, but when the most personal and intimate thing in life is paraded before others including some participants being dressed, or undressed, to the point that they would be arrested for indecent exposure in any other setting, it has gone too far. (See links below.)
After considerable thought we have concluded that, after 34 years with Wells Fargo, we can no longer be one of your customers. We are, therefore, phasing out our account with you and transferring to a bank that has community involvement in keeping with a higher standard.
We are sharing this e-mail with friends and family in hopes that, if they do banking with Wells Fargo, they will likewise take a stand for decency.
Salt Lake City Parades Towards Gomorrah
June 14, 2011
Someone said that if Congressmen Weiner had exposed himself on a public street as he has on the internet, he’d have been arrested. And yet we here in Utah do allow such shenanigans on our public streets. They are even city police-protected. It’s called the Gay Pride Parade.
In fact, if someone via the internet sent a child some of the images that appeared on the streets of Salt Lake City Sunday, June 5, they’d be arrested. There were many children present, as spectators and as participants, as usual. The parents might just as well have taken them on an outing to a gay bar, strip club, or Las Vegas adults-only show. These children are being taught to find men outrageously dressed as drag queens and homosexual acting out on the public streets things of great worth to be praised and celebrated with balloons and flags. Pride in sexual immorality is the new patriotism, complete with cheers, tears, and bursting hearts.
Such parades amount to earnest pilgrimages seeking vindication for lawless nonsense. That’s because everything licentious people stand for is now embraced by our society as worthy of the endorsement and encouragement of the media, public figures, the city and state, local businesses, churches, and all citizens, including children.
It’s being going on for decades — Salt Lake’s slobbering love affair with immoral, perverse, and high-risk ideas and behaviors, yes, in front of children, and yes, in this city founded by a church — while those who take any kind of stand against harmful permissiveness are silenced, dismissed, and even demonized.
Where is the mayor? Where is the governor? Where is Child Protective Services? Where are all the other people with power and influence who are obligated to defend virtue, protect children, and stand for God and goodness? They might as well have been waving from convertibles.
All it takes for this sort of thing to occur and to escalate is for good men to do nothing. But we’ve gone way past that. Apparently “good men” are facilitating it. In fact, the mayors of both Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County were in attendance to welcome the crowds. Shame on Salt Lake City for its undeniable and disgusting slouch – no, parade– towards Gomorrah.
The following is a great letter from one of our subscribers concerning the Gay Pride Parade:
June 8, 2011
Wells Fargo Bank,
Dear Wells Fargo Bank,
My wife and I have been Wells Fargo customers for many years. When I learned that Wells Fargo had entered a float in the Salt Lake Gay Pride Parade, I was angry and disgusted. I will not do business with a bank that supports the destructive and dangerous homosexual lifestyle. Would you mind explaining to me what there is to be “proud” about homosexual behavior?
Enclosed with this letter is a copy of a photo from the Tribune article about the parade. The young men shown are wearing nothing but pink underwear and flaunting their homosexuality. The whole parade was about the way in which they choose to have sex. Does Wells Fargo really believe that this is the kind of behavior a bank (or any other reputable business) should be promoting and encouraging? Would you want your own young children to go to such a parade? Wells Fargo should be ashamed about sponsoring this parade! Your position on this controversial issue has no doubt alienated and angered many of your customers as well as your own employees.
We are presently looking for another bank to do business with that does not support and promote the gay agenda. When we have found one, we will cancel our long-standing account with Wells Fargo.
(name withheld for privacy)
Here are some supportive SoL received about this message. Our thanks to those of our subscribers who take the time to write:
Thanks for having the courage to take a stand against this type of lewd, pornographic and immoral type of behavior. The real problem as I see it is that we need a total effort to take back the leadership of the politicians in Salt Lake.
The citizens of Salt Lake and I happen to believe also the church have been too complacent and wanting to accommodate alternative lifestyles and behaviors…. and as a result the anything goes attitude has taken over the city. Much of this type of bizarre, crazy thinking and attitude was a big part of the Rocky Anderson era, but it continues today and a monkey see…monkey do behavior is a part of the everyday thinking and attitudes.
We need the Church to take a stronger stand and we need people of all faiths to say no to this kind of degrading, evil performance on the streets of our community.
If our families from even 40 years ago could see this kind of thing happening on the streets of Salt Lake they would think that it was a terrible joke or they were watching demons from another planet.
It really is sad and the fact that so many good people buy into this nonsense means that the evil forces are in many ways winning.
It is disgusting, shameful, embarrassing and lacks any redeeming value.
We need new leaders…..we need men and women of courage to say “No…not or our streets….ever!”
Thanks for sharing. I have clients who are gay. As people I care for them and wish them all the best. I can't control what they do in their personal lives but when I see the Gaybune (Tribune) and other media doing stories with happy smiles on their faces, showing these images, it is painfully evident we live in a politically correct world. The only opinion that can be expressed seems to be the one that supports them. Otherwise you are hated and called homophobic. Its not about them having rights as they argue...it seems so clear there is an agenda.
“Recruiting children? You bet we are.”— Gay Magazine Admits Radical Agenda May 24, 2011
Many gays do not like it, but an online magazine, QUEERTY.com has published an article by editor Daniel Villarreal entitled, “Can We Please Just Start Admitting that We Do Actually Want to Indoctrinate Kids?” The author proudly confesses that one of the gay agenda’s main goals is to indoctrinate school children into accepting “queer sexuality as normal.”
The article states: “We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it.”
And “Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?”
And “I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.”
And “I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that it’s OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak.”
And “I would very much like for many of these young boys to grow up and . . .” I want lots of young ladies to develop into young women who voraciously . . . ”
And “not educating our kids about queer issues makes them ignorant, hateful little morons.”
The article urged fellow gays to face this reality, be proud of it, and combat resistence from those promoting traditional moral values by creating “ads — with tons of verifiable supporting evidence—that just plainly state that denying marriage equality ruins people’s lives.”
As we at SoL have said before, this fight is not about marriage. The institution of marriage is merely being exploited and redefined to promote the acceptance of risky, perverse, unlimited sexuality . . . yes, to kids.
Those promoting this agenda are making tremendous progress and they won’t stop. As the author of the article obviously knows, our society is at war for the hearts of its children, a war between two diametrically opposed world views: one hedonistic, the other God-centered. We quote: “Remember, Prop 8 passed along age lines with the very old voting largely in favor of it. The younger generation doesn’t fear homosexuality as much because they’re exposed to fags on TV, online, and at school.”
We congratulate our readers who are striving to counteract the gay agenda in their families, churches, and communities. For help, see the entire text of Me Tarzan, You Jane, a nondenominational book for the youngest children here or find the book available now at BYU Bookstore and tidalwavebooks.com. Also Chased by an Elephant (for LDS families) or Wild Elephant (for all other Christian families), The Gospel Truth About Today’s Stampeding Sexuality for families with older children.
Education? Or Stranger Danger? April 22, 2011
WARNING: The public school curricula being taught to minors contains offensive information, some of which is reported here.
The public school maturation programs that used to remind pre-pubescent kids to shower and wear deodorant now teach them about both sex’s genitalia, sexual feelings, and appalling symptoms of sexually-transmitted infections. Yes, here in Utah, strangers are introducing somebody’s else’s children to sex. This used to be called child abuse; now it is called education.
Children who in these programs are encouraged to seek out “the school nurse” or “counselor” for intimate questions about their bodies and feelings do not even know the names of these people; they are strangers to the children. Some seventh grade girls, so traumatized by being taught about “cauliflower-like growths” on genitalia, refused to eat the cauliflower in their lunch. Seventh graders were not told that HIV/Aids is primarily a promiscuous gay disease, but are led to believe that anyone, even healthy, faithful married couples, can contract it through their sexual relations.
We’re writing to alert you of dangerous Utah State Board of Education approved curricula being taught in the Alpine School District and probably all others. One is a maturation program for 5th and 6th graders produced by Planned Parenthood and the other is a unit in health classes for 7th graders.
See the 5th-6th grade maturation program, “Growing Up Comes First” on the website sponsored by Planned Parenthood. Some of the problems with this program are that it undermines parental authority, it is age-inappropriate and sexual, it greatly plays down the fact that there are essential differences between girls and boys, and it is co-ed (teaches about both sexes). (Earlier this month, the State Board voted unanimously to end its endorsement of the Planned Parenthood video, although schools can still use it if they want.)
Attached are handouts from the 7th grade health unit. Problems with this unit include that it is an elective but is not presented as such so most kids take it, parents are not fully alerted as to what it contains beforehand and usually sign the permission slip, it contains highly offensive and skewed material, it is presented in a co-ed class, and it requires children to share personal beliefs and feelings about sex and sexuality with the teacher.
Both boys and girls in a 7th grade class (around age 13) in varying stages of development learn together from a teacher (someone who is commonly not a permanent or intimate person in their lives) about male and female genitalia, gruesome symptoms of STIs including putrid penile and vaginal discharges and pubic lice and crabs; errections, ejaculation, and nocturnal emissions; "ways to show affection without sexual contact,” and much more. It's actually more information than these kids will ever need to know and it is presented without the proper values and principles that should be attached. (When a parent complained to the teacher, the teacher's lame excuse was that the kids need to know all of this so they can describe their symptoms to a doctor.)
Even though abstinence seems to be emphasized as per Utah code, which sounds like a good thing, this law is being exploited as a way for strangers to teach sex and sexuality in detail to the young. The unit ends up giving and requiring too much information, some of which is skewed, becoming highly age-inappropriate, intrusive, and harmful. It's like a drug-free school program that introduces kids in detail to the strange and interesting world of drugs and drug paraphenalia. See the attached handouts given to 7th graders at Lehi Junior High last month.
Parents and grandparents should make sure these programs are not being used in their schools. If they are, you should study them out, call or write your child’s teacher, school, school district, and Utah State Board of Education to point out what is wrong with these misdirected and dangerous programs. Even if some parents opt their child out, these ideas and attitudes become part of our culture and hurt everyone.
If you think school administrators and educators in Utah (and every other state) care about the safety and innocence of children and the sacrosanct rights of parents, think again. There are those who are using every opportunity to subvert our rights and values in the name of tolerance, enlightenment, and diversity. In our recent LDS General Conference D. Todd Christopherson quoted Kenda Dean, who called this trendy philosophy “niceness” and “benign whateverism.” Schools are no longer about the three R’s. They are about indoctrinating children with the “progressive” ideas of whoever happens to be in charge of the schools. Here is a quote from a Utah State School Board meeting, April 8, 2011.
Leslie Castle (District 7, SLC): “I do believe kids learn things in school that they don’t learn at home. Schools are for discussions with people who feel differently than their parents do, broaden their horizons, illuminating and enlightening kids beyond their parents’ views.”
What? Parents send their kids to school so they can learn to espouse different feelings and values than those they are striving to pass on to them? We think not. Parents need to know that elementary school is the new liberal university campus, teachers and administrators the new stranger danger.
Be prepared to be treated dismissively when standing up to the progressivism in our public schools.
Attention all parents, grandparents, leaders, and teachers
April 4, 2011
Do children need to be taught the proper attitudes about male and female, romantic feelings, and marriage? YES! But what is our modern culture teaching them? All manner of wrong ideas! Here is help!
Standard of Liberty and Tidal Wave Books are pleased to announce Me Tarzan, You Jane, a 28-page book for the youngest children filled with God’s timeless truths about the most basic of realities. The author is Janice Barrett Graham, an award-winning children’s writer whose stories and articles have appeared in a long list of publications including Highlights for Children and The Friend.
Me Tarzan, You Jane is nondenominational, charmingly illustrated, and contains such gentle language that parents will feel comfortable with unlimited readings of this book with children of any age.
Given most parents’ natural respect for childhood modesty, many children are growing up exposed to unchallenged misinformation regarding gender and gender roles. Thus, the simple truths contained in this book are for ALL children. Our oversexed, secularized, Godless environment puts every child in danger of developing complacent, perverse attitudes and slipping into the arbitrary, politically correct philosophies of the day that will affect every aspect of their welfare. In today’s jungle, Me Tarzan, You Jane is a great tool to help instill essential healthy attitudes and counteract wildly popular falsehoods.
Please take a look at the text of this book in its entirety below. Feel free to use this text with your family, or if you’d like the charming book, it is now available online for only $7.00 per copy, including shipping. Click here to order. Please allow 1-2 weeks for delivery.
Available for families with older children are our new chapter books, Chased by an Elephant (specifically for LDS families) and Wild Elephant (for Christian families, nondenominational) The Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality. Click here to order for just $10 each, including. Please allow 1-2 weeks for delivery.
Coming soon is Captain of My Soul, the true story of a young man’s journey into and out of the darkness of sexual confusion and addiction.
Me Tarzan You Jane
by Janice Barrett Graham
illustrated by Lili Ribeira and Andrew S. Graham
Copyright 2011 by Janice Barrett Graham
Imagine Tarzan growing up in the jungle, the only human being. Then one day he meets Jane. She is the first human girl Tarzan has ever seen, and he sees she is different from him. This is because Tarzan is a boy and Jane is a girl.
There is no other kind of normal human being. Just those two, male and female. This is how God made us. You can call them boys and girls, men and women, ladies and gentlemen, guys and gals, even dudes and dudettes! Tarzan figured it out pretty quick when he said, “Me Tarzan. You Jane.”
One of the first things all new moms and dads want to know is if they are having a boy or a girl. Whether you are male or female is shown in every cell of your body. Scientists can even tell if ancient mummies thousands of years old are male or female!
Being a boy or a girl means more and more as we grow up. The differences between male and female are necessary to human life. Respect for this timeless truth helps people live in an orderly way.
The Ramifications of President Obama’s
Uncostitutional DOMA Action
February 25, 2011
Pres. Obama announced Wednesday, February 23, that DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act that states marriage is between a man and a woman, signed into law by Pres. Clinton in 1996) is unconstitutional and has ordered the Dept. of Justice to no longer defend DOMA. This means that when a federal court case comes up challenging DOMA, the federal government will not respond to the complaint, nor will they assign any attorneys to the case, so the case against DOMA will automatically be won.
A hypothetical example would be when a gay “married” couple, one partner of which works for the IRS, want the federal agency to provide marriage-like benefits such as health insurance showing them as spouses. Even though DOMA says this is impossible, they could file a complaint in federal court and it would be sent to the Justice Dept. which would not respond. The judge would then automatically rule in favor of the gay couple.
Also part of DOMA is the exemption of states from Article 4 of the Constitution. This means states that don’t allow for gay marriage don’t have to recognize gay marriages performed in other states. But because of the President’s declaration, the same thing will happen as the above in regards to any law suits from gays claiming marriage complaining against a state that outlaws it. In other words, Utah is one law suit away from its state constitution’s marriage amendment being virtually nullified. You can be sure that gay couples, “married” out of state, are now all set up to file complaints against Utah. As things now stand, soon all state laws defining traditional marriage will be invalidated.
In essence, what the president did was unconstitutional, that is, declare an act of Congress unconstitutional without going through the legal process: either getting Congress to repeal it or getting a federal court to declare it unconstitutional. This act was a usurpation of presidential authority, the very thing our Founders strove to prevent by instituting federalism and our government’s unique system of checks and balances.
Still, all hope may not be lost because of our having a U.S. Supreme Court that leans conservative. When faced with this issue, which will probably be soon, the Supreme Court could find the DOMA law constitutional. It may also rightly rule that the President/federal government does not have the right to interfere with marriage, that it’s under state jurisdiction. In that case, each state will continue to have control over how it handles marriage.
It should be noted that our Founders never thought of marriage being licenced at all; it was strictly a religious institution. In more recent history, any government involvement or support of marriage, as in divorce laws and tax benefits, was mainly about the family, that is, the safety, security, nurturing, and teaching of children that often come from the union of man and woman. This was done in the best interests of society as a whole because it was rightly believed that strong families make a strong nation. This sounded good, but now that government is involved there seems to be no way out and no limits on government power over marriage. Government involvement paved the way for the gay movement, with the help of very bad public policies and laws concerning marriage since the ‘60s, to shift marriage to be first about the adult individual and adult relationships.
With our moral foundation lost, the next to go will be religious freedom. Aside from intimidation from gay activists causing churches to soften their stance and compromise their integrity here and there, churches may soon be coerced by government into treating gays and gay relationships as equal with male/female relationships, including performing same-sex marriages, or cease to exist as we know them. Ultimately, after a series of legal maneuvers and developments (which are now accelerating), all churches will either survive for the time being by fully accepting homosexualism in their midst or dissolve because they refuse to change their speech, publishing, and practices to accommodate homosexuality. Either way, religious people are intimidated and religious freedom is oppressed. Believe it, this gay thing is definitely big enough to disband churches and crush religious freedom and is perhaps being exploited by the powers that be to do just that.
What can be done? Since the Justice Dept. will no longer defend DOMA, Congress can step in on its own behalf and defend its own law. It is expected that Congress with do this. As citizens we can call and write our senators and representatives to encourage this measure. As church leaders and members we can stand for truth and righteousness at all times, in all things, and in all places, come what may.
SoL Editor's note: Here's a letter one of our subscribers wrote and sent to both Senators and his member of the House in response to the above SoL Voice
We are outraged at the Obama administration's plan to not defend the DOMA Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law in 1996 by Pres. Bill Clinton. Obama has decided to abdicate his responsibility to uphold this law. As Newt G. said of recent, in so many words, that Obama is striking down a federal law all on his own- against the congress's wishes which is unconstitutional, since he has sworn under oath to uphold the federal laws. So as a conservative Republican, what is your plan to defend DOMA?
Note: This abdication by Obama has the far reaching effects to perhaps cause churches who oppose homosexual marriages to either get in line with gay marriages or go under as churches and shut down as a church. This abdication by Obama could eventually imperil freedom of religion in the USA since the fed gov. is now so involved with marriage in the USA, and gays will no doubt put pressure on churches to grant them a marriage. What do you think and what are your plans to head off Obama and the Justice Dept and the gay community if in fact, you agree with me?
DU and LU
Gay Activists’ New Frontier: Conservative Politics
February 21, 2011
Gays--politically conservative? That’s the newest tactic. We were at CPAC in Washington D.C. February 10-12 selling our new book and helping at the PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) booth and saw it for ourselves. The Marriot Hotel was abuzz with the incredible news that a group called GOProud was a new sponsor of the 38th annual Conservative Political Action Conference and had a booth in the exhibit hall.
Sex activists have systematically attacked and infiltrated our marriage, family, education, and church institutions with their radical amoral agenda under the guises of equality, normalcy, and progress. Their latest insinuation into conservative politics is just another tentacle reaching in to squeeze God and goodness out of America.
GOProud apparently leans heavily on the idea of fiscal conservatism. But whether or not anyone there is really concerned about conservative economic principles (no deficit spending, cutting taxes and gov. spending, reducing size of government, etc.) which we doubt, it is obvious that any gay activist group is not socially conservative (pro-sexual morality, pro-traditional marriage, pro-mother/father parenting, etc.).
Here’s the truth that blows GOProud’s cover. Exploited gays need to know, along with everyone else, that homosexualism and all aspects of American conservatism have irreconcilable differences. At the 2010 Values Voter Summit we heard Senator Jim DeMint point out that you can’t be a true fiscal conservative without being a social conservative also. You can’t have the former without the latter. For example Sen. DeMint used the problem of the increase in the number of births to unwed mothers (now up to 40%). If there were more social conservatism (support for traditional values), that number would decrease and government financial support would decrease also. The same is true for all social problems such as crime, drugs, illegal immigration, health care, STD’s, abortion, and gambling. If these problem were handled through the lens of traditional values, they would decrease and so would government spending. Instead, misguided liberal government policies are seriously exacerbating these social problems. In other words, big government is spending our tax money to make these social problems worse. The corrupt Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the nation, receiving 360-odd millions annually from our government, is a case in point.
DeMint went on to say that conservatism itself is based on people controlling themselves while liberalism is based on the government controlling people. A government that purges religion purges traditional values. Our courts are in the process of getting rid of all religious influence in our society. This development touches everything: schools, businesses, families. Think about a people with no values; the government has to step in and control all the corruption. Say goodbye to freedom and hello to tyranny.
No, people who define themselves by their deviant sexual proclivities (GOProud) are not conservative, fiscally or any other way. Those who thumb their noses at social conservatism are themselves contributing to the fiscal problem. The good news is, because of CPAC’s decision to accept GOProud as a new sponsor, true conservative sponsors (Heritage Foundation, American Family Association, Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, and Liberty Counsel) boycotted the event. CPAC has since rethought that decision and has voted to withdraw GOProud’s invitation in the future.
A few more thoughts about CPAC.
We were at the booth one day when two men and a young person stopped by. The men were aghast, saying they had never heard of these crazy ideas, such as that people weren’t born gay and that gays could change their sexual orientation. They talked and listened for ten or fifteen minutes, but the young person said absolutely nothing, just stood there listening close-mouthed with an understated but rather wide-eyed, negative expression. This young person at first appeared to be a slim neat female in her late teens or early twenties, with every short hair in place, obvious eye make-up, foundation, and pink lipstick, wearing a skirt and heavy coat with a high collar. But on closer inspection, despite this disguise, we could see this person had the eyes, complexion, hands, and subtle body movements of a male. No wonder he never spoke; his male voice would surely give him away. To us this is unspeakably bizarre and sad.
Ann Coulter addressed the issue of GOProud in her speech at CPAC. She said she wished they hadn’t identified themselves in this sexual way, but had attended like everyone else, as concerned American citizens. She also said she felt gays were being co-opted as a tool by liberals to use gay marriage to help destroy the family and radically change the culture. (Remember that totalitarian regimes always undermine family and religion early on.) Earlier she had talked GOProud into letting go of their gay marriage plank.(Could it be that most gays don’t really care about being “married?” Answer: yes.) She added that she had a lot of gay friends and wished there could be gayness without sodomy. We say dream on, Ann.
We occasionally receive emails that tell us something about our readers.
Here is one we thought you would find interesting, and our response. January 10, 2011
Date: Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 12:30 AM
Hello, my name is Brianna and I'm 20 years old and a sophomore in college. I came across this site and I was overly offended by most of the content here. Honestly, if I was a teenager again i would have probably started cursing and yelling, but being a bit older I know what I want to say to people like you now. I article I'm commenting on is "gay clubs in high schools". Over all that articles was just offensive. I can't believe that in this world we can really STILL be saying that "Rainbows are harmless. Homosexuality is not."....It really makes me sick in the stomach. It is ignorance like this that starts hateful wars, killing, prejudice. I feel like she really was completely sheltered as a child with overly religious parents that shoved the bible down her throat. And since she is straight she had no idea what she is talking about, how can ANYONE that isn't close to someone who is gay or someone who is straight have any RIGHT talking about homosexuality?? Though I may not been gay I'm not ignorant. I have friends who are gay, my mother has adult friends that are gay, and hearing them out and talking with them about what it was like being gay when they were young is a sad story full of struggle. What is so wrong with people coming together and being a support? Religious groups do that same thing...I mean I was in youth groups and everything. I have nothing against God or the bible. What I have a problem is this ignorances and arrogance. There is nothing dangerous with Homosexuality. the LGB clubs OF COURSE talk about the dangers of intercourse. Teenagers are not ignorant about sex. They are teenagers. And anyway, you can't make the argument with HIV and AIDS....that
isn't a gay disease...anyone can get aids. It just happens that there are more tearing during anal sex then vaginal...Even straight couples have anal. So that argument is faulty. And being gay is just normal, just like straight. I can't believe this article. I support freedom of speech, petition, and religion, but this crosses the line into prejudice, thinking that you are right and everyone else is wrong. And just to say that God's law, was only made by man. I feel like the church forgets how many people they have murdered because of how the bible was interoperated. Lets look at the crusades, the witch hunts, the monarchies, women's rights being suppressed, thrown in asylums durning the victorian era to rot, the KKK....I can go on and on and on....but it always end up the same. Though I have nothing wrong with religious as a concept, it is purely SICK that religious people believe they have the right to put other's down! Gay's never hated the church, they just want to live their lives without the hatred. They never started anything but wanting the freedom to LIVE. How can we judge what is right and what is wrong. It says in the bible that God is the ONLY one that can judge us! No HUMAN has the right to judge another. Ever. You may be able to pray for them, and voice concerns but being prejudice like this is a sin. Anyway, you can't MAKE someone gay. There are families where the parents are gay and the children grow up being straight....you can have overly strict zelot parents that their kids can turn out totally gay.
But to conclude...this is wrong, hurtful, ridiculous, sad and prejudice...can't we just get along?
Thank you for perusing our web site and taking the time to share your strong feelings. We are sharing your email with our subscribers because it is a very good example of how a growing number of well-meaning people, young people in particular whose life experience is very limited, initially react to our point of view. They react this way because moral relativism along with the rejection of traditional sexual morality, the watering down of Christianity, and gay cultural indoctrination is what they have grown up with and all they know. In addition, they themselves, their friends, relatives, or others in their circle of acquaintance, may claim to be gay. Because they have been fooled into accepting their own or someone else’s alternative sexual proclivities as an identity in a legitimate minority group, they naturally refuse to tolerate any other view.
The fact that time-honored traditional sexual morality and the unique risks of homosexual behavior seem to be completely foreign ideas to you is indicative of how the accumulated wisdom of the ages, simple biological realities, and even common sense have been suppressed by an arbitrary, self-serving, and irresponsible trend. C. S. Lewis referred to this as a conditioning of many members of the gullible public by a lucky few with the means to do it.
We encourage you to think for yourself and explore another view. Of course, thinking these things through may not go over well with friends, family, and others. Truth is often uncomfortable. For instance, sometimes we have to choose between truth and being approved of by others. Why should we choose truth? Because truth enables us to offer real compassion, real `comfort, and real help. An example is how families and friends intervene to offer help to an alcoholic or drug addict they love. Pretending there is no problem is actually unkind. And yes, homosexuality is a problem. To begin with, it is maladaptive, addictive, may be a symptom of deep emotional trauma or mental illness, and leads to inordinately harmful behaviors.
A few points to clear up:
-It seems you missed Our Story which shows that we do know something about the homosexual mindset and lifestyle, its causes and its cures.
-Human sexual behaviors are always a choice for which we are each accountable, except perhaps in the case of severe mental illness/deficiently.
-It is common knowledge that decent straight people do not commit sodomy or anything like it. Sodomy is not mating; it is not the natural act that can make babies. It is an unsafe simulation, to put it mildly. Any self-respecting woman would not willingly consent to this act (the vagina can safely accommodate intercourse whereas the anus never can). It is the gay movement that has promoted the lie that everyone does this or that sexual behavior (introduced in the sexual revolution of the 1960s) in order to justify extreme, promiscuous, unnatural, and dangerous sexual behaviors. Doctors who care for patients who indulge in such acts can testify to the painful, chronic, and even fatal damage they do to an otherwise healthy body.
-A healthy, faithful man and woman who enjoy sexual intimacy in the only way natural to the human body can never get or spread HIV/AIDS (or any other sexually transmitted disease) from what they do together.
Please note that we at SoL treat everyone with respect. We discuss ideas, trends, human nature, events, and true principles rather than bash individuals, and encourage you to do the same.
Keep reading and all best wishes,
--Stephen and Janice Graham, Standard of Liberty
Do Ask, Do Tell: Congress Flies Gay Flag Over Our Troops December 22, 2010
It is perhaps the darkest day in the history of our essential American Military. What is the most discriminatory of all governmental institutions, at the price of our national defense, now flies under the phony gay rainbow flag. The lame duck U. S. Congress hurried to repeal the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law December 18, 2010, a law signed by President Clinton in 1993 that disallowed open homosexuality in the military. Even though this law was better than nothing, it showed a fatal degree of acceptance toward alternative sexuality. Clinton was in essence saying, okay, we accept gayness as legitimate, just keep it to yourself if you’re a soldier. This was the slippery slope that led to the law’s repeal; if gayness is legitimate, why shouldn’t gays be able to proclaim their preference and act out? With the repeal of this law it appears that open alternative sexuality/alternative gender identities will now be allowed among military personnel.
New rules relative to gays in the military will be promulgated. As with every societal institution, we must now ask ourselves how allowing homosexuality and the like in the everyday activities of our armed forces will look. The ramifications of the repeal of this law, the collateral damage and the infrastructural changes that would have to be made to maintain some degree of integrity, discipline, decorum, and order, seem practically endless. We cannot make a comprehensive list, nor can we imagine them all, but here are some that will have to be faced:
– Soldiers’ unity, trust, and discipline will be compromised. (Women in the U. S. military are not allowed to fight on the front lines side-by-side with male soldiers and are required to live in separate barracks, one reason for this being that women prove to be a distraction and temptation to men. If sexuality between soldiers is allowed to be openly practiced, undue preferences, jealousies, and lewdness will most likely result that will put order, effectiveness, and lives at risk. Will same-sex partners who may be legally married to each other get to be in the same unit and engage in sexual activities in barracks or in battle in close quarters with the other soldiers? This public display may be acceptable to them but offensive to others.)
– Chaplains, and all others who hold fast to their Biblical religious beliefs, including those conservative officers seeking career advancement, will have to get with the program of accepting homosexuality (and gay marriage?) as normal or be fired, otherwise punished, or forced to resign. In this way their first amendment freedoms of speech and the free practice of religion will be obliterated. (We might say the U. S. Military is now doing the exact opposite of what it was intended, that is, to defend America and all it stands for. We have to decide which freedoms we will prefer and protect: those enumerated in our constitution or out-of-bounds individual sexual freedoms a relative few have decided are more important.)
– Retention and recruitment will suffer. There are those currently in the military, and those who plan on military careers, who will change their plans because of the acceptance of open homosexuality. There are men who do not want to train, bunk, shower, sleep, and fight alongside other men who have homosexual/anal sex on their minds. Parents will discourage their children from joining for these same reasons.
– How about housing? It isn’t fair or decent or proper to put straight and gay men together in close quarters. So where should gays live? With women? This isn’t fair or decent or proper for women. With each other in a whole new set of barracks? Even worse! (And the same goes for lesbians.) How about gay couples who are “married?” Will the military have to provide them housing alongside heterosexual couples? All this would be paid for by American taxpayers.
– Will military doctors and hospitals be forced to perform sex change surgeries? What uniforms, male or female, will these unfortunate people wear in the process and after? Will normal men and normal women have to live and serve and fight alongside these distracting, confused people? What about the soldier whose decides his gender identity is liquid and changes from day to day? Will they be required to choose a permanent gender identity?
– Will the same rules for sexual morality apply to homo or bisexuals that apply to heterosexuals? (There are strict rules for sexual conduct in the military.) Or will gays be allowed to act out indiscriminately? Will they say that since they don’t get to be married they should be allowed to engage in unlimited sex with unlimited partners?
– In a structured all-male environment where homosexuality is publicly and openly accepted and practiced if only through casual activities such as conversation, flirting, dancing, and dating, homosexual behavior will spread, secretly if need be. Emboldened by public legitimization, there is no doubt there will be an increase in men initiating other/younger men into homosexuality (pulling rank?), which will cause an inordinate spread of homosexual behaviors and corresponding illnesses and diseases.
– Military courts will be swamped with cases involving all manner of sexuality and sexual behaviors, including sexual freedom vs. religious freedom. If we think we have seen outrageous gay-based court cases in civilian courts, just wait for the onslaught from the military sector where innocent people trying to do their jobs turn into sitting ducks for the gay juggernaut.
The military tradition has always included the enforcement of sound sexual morality. This all- volunteer force is mostly comprised of Christians who overwhelming disapproved of repealing the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law. ANY sexual immorality has previously been distrusted, disallowed, and punished in the U. S. military. This is about to change. Gayness is all about acting out. Unless this country drastically changes direction, over time we will see the order, health, strength, and effectiveness of this great and essential institution diminish.
Where institutions are concerned, it appears that our military has been the last holdout against the open acceptance of all manner of alternative sexuality. In the last decade especially, our schools and even churches have been succumbing to the pressure from the powerful, deceptive, victimhood-claiming gay lobby. What is really a problematic disorder, an unnatural choice, and an immoral and highly risky behavior that harms individuals and weakens nations, is now supported and celebrated in a government that once held fast to God and His rules for sexual morality.
What can you do? Contact those who voted against the repeal of this law and thank them. Contact those who voted for it and express your disapproval. Share these developments and your beliefs with others and take these sentiments to the voting booth.
LDS Book for Families Gets Perez Hilton’s Attention:
Who Knew Chastity Could be so Controversial? October 20, 2010
Standard of Liberty’s new book, Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality, recently having been picked up by Walmart stores in highly LDS populated areas in the intermountain west, and having been featured in a short local spot on KTVX Channel 4, has been getting a lot of attention from organizations promoting homosexuality.
The book has been highlighted online at more than a dozen magazines, web sites, and blogs including Q Salt Lake magazine, GayLGBT.com, The Advocate, and the web site of Perez Hilton, a nationally-known blogger and the judge who asked Miss California the question about gay marriage in the Miss USA pageant a few years ago. Online sites have received a flurry of comments and tens of thousands of views. A petition has been instigated to pressure Walmart into dropping this product.
The Christ-centered book is for LDS parents to present to children ages 10 and up. With its emphasis on the Godhead and basic gospel principles, it reiterates the reality of male and female, natural gender roles, and God’s law regarding sexual manners. One of its 12 chapters lists several ways human sexuality can veer dangerously out of bounds, including homosexuality. The book was written to present a worldview opposite to what is being presented in schools and in the media targeting younger and younger children. (See articles on Helena, Montana and Boulder, Colorado.)
Considering the amount of fierce and often vicious opposition from certain individuals and groups that the Standard of Liberty has received for its religious and moral stand (mostly ad hominem attacks including death wishes), it seems that the gay movement is not only anti-traditional morality, but carries anti-God, anti-parental authority, and anti-free speech elements as well.
There is some false information going around about the book such as what it’s about and a photo of a stranger who is supposed to be the author, but some truth manages to get through. A surprising number of comments posted on these gay-affirming sites defend the author’s right to free speech. Click here to see Perez Hilton’s blog and readers’ comments regarding Chased by an Elephant.
Chased by an Elephant for LDS families is available at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, BYU Bookstore, Tidal Wave Books, and Wal-Mart. (If it is not in your Wal-Mart, ask at the Service Desk; they can order it for you.)
Another version of this book called Wild Elephant for nondenominational Christian families, is so far available at Tidal Wave Books.
Captain of My Soul, a young man’s riveting true story of conquering pornography addiction and homosexuality through therapy, faith, and family support.
Me Tarzan, You Jane, a picture book for little children which presents God’s truth about male and female, gender roles, mating and marriage in prose so gentle parents will feel comfortable reading it aloud again and again.
Chased by an Elephant NOW IN OVER 100 WALMART STORES!
October 7, 2010
We are pleased to announce that our distributor, Brigham Distributing, has informed us that our new book, Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality for LDS families is now available at 104 Walmart stores in the Intermountain West. It is also at the BYU Bookstore, at tidalwavebooks.com, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, or contact us at sgraham@standardofliberty,org.
This charming, unique, and important book is a must-read for leaders and parents to use as they see fit that stunningly and resoundingly echos the truths and warnings presented in President Boyd K. Packer’s conference talk this past Sunday (October 3, 2010). For the sake of our children and youth, we can no longer afford to be silent on this topic. Given the licentious world around them, they need to be purposely taught the correct information and attitudes concerning human sexuality and God’s law of chastity.
We also have now available Wild Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality, written especially for the non-LDS, general Christian family, at tidalwavebooks.com.
President Packer’s Words:
An Answer to Prayers, A Warning Voice,
An Exercise of Religious Freedom
On Sunday, October 3, 2010, President Boyd K. Packer, at the General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, reiterated some common sense, basic doctrines, and deeply-held beliefs inherent in the LDS faith as they pertain to the proper use of the power of procreation. This talk was an answer to our continual prayer that the Church raise a warning voice, speaking out loud and clear on this important topic. Our main concern is with the rising generation which is being bombarded with messages that falsify, distort, and devalue human sexuality and natural gender roles, marriage and mating, posterity and parenting. Innocent victims of this propaganda are getting younger and younger. Just this past month we have talked to the distraught mother of a recalcitrant 14-year-old who insists he is “gay” and have been informed of a group of LDS boys as young as 8 years old announcing to their parents that they were born in the wrong bodies. As Pres. Packer put it, “This General Conference was convened at a time when there is such confusion and such danger that our young people hardly know which way they can walk.” You can hear President Packer’s talk.
A deluge of disappointment, anger, and intimidation from sexual activists toward President Packer and the Church has resulted. We bring this to your attention in order to raise awareness of the intense opposition to nature, reality, scientific facts, and God’s laws that exists and the need for parents to teach their children truth and correct attitudes. To get an idea of the outspoken resistance to President Packer’s talk coming from Church members and non-members alike, see www.sltrib.com.
Here at the Standard of Liberty we believe that attacks coming from those who demand that the Church change to fit modern worldly whims and to embrace the fashionable vices of the day show more than rebellion against reality, God, and nature. They also illustrate a bullying attempt to deny others the very freedom they are exercising themselves, that is, America’s guaranteed freedom to speak and live according to the dictates of one’s own conscience. (This is a real threat. For example, Canada now has laws that forbid Christians to speak against homosexual behavior. Click here to read about a Canadian pastor recently being fined and told to renounce his faith. It is up to us as citizens to do all we can to maintain this freedom, such as vote in the coming elections for representatives who will support religious liberty. More on this later.) In addition, they display a gross misunderstanding of the nature of Christianity itself. Almighty God, with His goals for the eternal progression of His children, makes certain demands on us. Contrary to what many now insist, what Christ offers is not massage therapy; it is heart surgery.
Please support President Packer in standing for truth and righteousness, sounding a clear and much-needed warning voice, and exercising his Constitutionally-protected freedoms despite intense intimidation. You can send an email to the Church’s Public Affairs office at email@example.com. (we are told your email will be forwarded to Pres. Packer) or send a note or postcard to President Boyd K. Packer, 50 East North Temple, Salt Lake City, UT, 84150.
–Standard of Liberty
A Monumental Day: SoL’s Report on Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally in Washington D. C.
August 28, 2010
Steve flew in Thursday and on Saturday he and I left our daughter’s house in Maryland (where I have been staying for a month helping with her 10-month-old triplets) at seven a.m. Emily drove us to the metro station nearby and before we got out of her van we saw people obviously doing the same thing we were doing: heading for Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor rally at the National Mall. “Where are you from?” Steve asked nearly everyone we came close to and we heard Delaware, Missouri, Ohio, Connecticut, Arkansas. Everyone was so surprised we had come all the way from Utah. When asked if we drove or flew, Steve quipped, “We pushed our handcarts.” “What’s a handcart?” somebody undertoned, embarrassed. A Texas group with matching red t-shirts stepped on board, their leader rousting us all with a stentorian, “Anybody here going to the rally?” There was a feeling of unity and gratitude and excitement in the air. People offered each other seats, introduced themselves, spoke with the strangers sitting alongside them of things close to their hearts.
Steve and I remarked to each other that we had no way of knowing how many people would show up. But it was obvious when there was standing room only on the Metro ten stops out three hours before the rally was to start, that the crowd was going to be overwhelming. It took us a while just to get on the escalator to exit the Smithsonian Metro station. Everywhere people were talking, smiling, patient and willing to help each other.
I have never been anywhere with so many people gathered in one place. They just kept coming in never-ending parades. I was grateful it was not nearly as hot and humid as it had been earlier in the week. Steve and I walked past the Washington Monument, down the lawn, past the World War II Memorial, and got as close as we could to the Lincoln Memorial where the speakers and performers would stand. This ended up being on the north side of the Reflecting Pool three quarters of the way toward the World War II Memorial on the side under some trees. From here we couldn’t see the actual set-up, but had a good view of the last of six JumboTtrons. We could see across the Pool and back toward the Washington Monument. The place was suffused with color and movement, every empty space filling in. We set up our chairs among some others and relaxed. Two hours to go. As more people came along those of us already situated squeezed closer together to make yet another spot.
And there were all kinds of people. As we waited for the rally to start I looked around me and saw a pretty lady in a sun dress, a well-coifed grandma with hair as white as her jeans, a Viet Nam vet with a long gray ponytail, a business man in metal-rimmed glasses and khaki shorts, a southern belle in a sunbonnet, three teenage boys in baseball caps, a round-bellied guy in a Hawaiian shirt, a black woman with a gold camera on her wrist, a young couple in love, a little girl in a yellow shirt with pig tails sitting on her father’s shoulders, an Asian woman under a bright orange umbrella, a lady in black short-shorts with pick hearts munching popcorn with her husband, a heavy lady with a fanny pack passing around a bag for trash, a young woman in cropped jeans pinning a small jeweled American flag on her navy shirt, a retired couple reading the paper side-by-side in polka-dotted camp chairs, and families, families everywhere.
“There’s a sea of people everywhere you look,” said someone near.
“Still coming,” said another.
What I didn’t see was a single sign (Glenn asked that there be no signs), a single bit of stray trash, or a single act of rudeness. “Don’t let me get in your way,” a lady said to me. Courtesy and good spirits abounded. Just as the rally was set to begin at 10, a large flock of Canadian geese in perfect V-formation suddenly appeared and flew low, straight over the middle of the Reflecting Pool to the Lincoln Memorial. All eyes looked up and everyone clapped, then people wiped their eyes under their sunglasses. The Greeks believed birds were a good omen, too.
We were treated to a recording of the Tabernacle Choir singing, “Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing” and a slide show of cities and states all across the USA. People clapped when they recognized their homes. As a woman belted the National Anthem I watched a great big man, trembling with tears, wipe his face with the palms of his two big hands.
Glenn Beck wasted no time in setting the tone for the rally. It was to be a revival of American religiosity, of love of God and country. And everyone there, as far as I could see, was on the exact same page. Beck’s announcement, “Today, this country is turning back to God,” was met with rousing applause. He gave a short sketch of the first colonists, adding, “The first thing they did was pray,” and so this is what we did, too. The prayer was all about our nation’s need to repent. It was all about Christ the Redeemer.
It struck me that here we were, living in a time when the very freedoms we were at that moment so freely exercising, heartened and emboldened by our sheer numbers, are being threatened by our own government. Among other things, was Glenn Beck peaceably defying leadership gone astray? I think so, as were we all. It is difficult to express how glorious it was to participle in this gathering, in this prayer, and to say amen to these words, in this place, at this time in America’s history.
The program for the rally continued with an inspiring multi-faceted tribute to the military’s Special Operations Warrior Foundation. This was followed by a speech by Sarah Palin who said there is no “transforming America,” only “restoring America.” Glenn Beck announced that there would be Faith, Hope, and Charity merit awards which were then introduced with inspiring speeches and presented to veteran Texas pastor C.L. Jackson, Christian baseball player Albert Pujols, and businessman and philanthropist John Huntsman Sr. Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King, then gave a speech about unity for the sake of honor to rebuild America. Dr. Harry Jackson spoke using lots of scriptures, including Romans 8:28. We heard phrases such as “we are one human family” and “the procreation foundation of marriage,” and “our nations’s moral deficiency will be healed when prayer is once again welcome in public arenas and schools,” and “America must pray that God will forgive us of our sins.” About this time Steve and I looked behind us and saw that people were filling in the lawn all the way to the Washington Monument.
Glenn Beck took up the last portion of the three hours. “Advance or perish,” he said. “God is the answer and always has been.” “Trust in the Lord.” “Look forward.” “Look to people who are honest and have integrity.” “Our values and principles must unite us.”
He talked about how Americans have explored west, up in space, down in the ocean, and must now explore within ourselves.
He spoke of how he has been called a “fearmonger.” To this he said, “On the Titanic, the man who said, ‘It’s an iceberg!” was not a fearmonger. He was warning the people on the ship.”
He reiterated his forty-day challenge:
1. Pray on your knees and profess God (and let your children see your praying).
2. Tell the truth (even when it is going to hurt you) in your own life and expect it from others.
3. Connect with your spouse and children because charity begins at home.
Following are some more of the highlights of his talk from my notes:
Does the American experience expand or end with us?
The words inscribed at the top of the Washington Monument are Laus Deo (Praise be to God). He said that the Founders’ idea was that to really share truth, we must embed it in our monuments.
Find out what you truly believe. Quoted Thomas Jefferson: “Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.” (I looked across the way and saw a lady mouthing these words.)
Realize who God is and who you are. Great benefits and awesome responsibilities will come with this knowledge. You will no longer have a choice in many things.
His favorite line in the Declaration of Independence is “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”
Washington gave up the life he wanted (to be a surveyor) to do God’s will.
The truth will set you free (after it has made you miserable).
Go to God individually first.
We have to be on God’s side, not him on our side.
Need support of good spouse, families, friends.
We must insist that our churches stand for what we know to be true, universal, eternal.
Churches have fallen asleep. We need a black robed regiment (ministers that preach freedom).
(At this point there were 250 people arm-in-arm standing behind Glenn representing that many different denominations.)
All agree that God is the answer.
Is the next George Washington in this crowd? Our goal must be to raise the next great monument.
We can wallow in our mistakes or learn from the past and ask for redemption.
A tenor, accompanied by bagpipes, sang Amazing Grace. I looked around and saw people singing along and weeping.
The rally lasted three hours. Afterwards, during some afterglow vocal performances, many people ate the picnic lunches they had brought, sat on the lawns enjoying the day, or toured the mall. Steve and I did a little of all three. We even caught a glimpse of Al Sharpton’s “protest march,” but I couldn’t for the life of me understand what they could possibly be protesting. It couldn’t have been a racial thing because there were a great many black people performing and speaking and getting awards at Glenn’s rally.
Speaking of monuments, I think every American sixth grader should visit our nation’s capitol. It should be part of the curriculum. I find myself wondering, Why was I not told of these magnificent stone monuments engraved with reminders of God and the highest human virtues? Whey was I not taught to recite the resplendent sentence that appears above the 19-foot tall bronze statue of Thomas Jefferson? Why didn’t I learn that the building of the monolithic Washington Monument was halted during the Civil War? Why was I not encouraged to consider with reverence the significance of the Lincoln Memorial while seeing its white marble set against a navy blue, star-studded night sky as a child? How are we to be a nation of what Samuel Adams called “experienced patriots” whom our country stands in need of “to prevent its ruin” if we are not schooled in our country’s foundations? And what better way to begin to become those experienced patriots than to see with our own eyes these beautiful massive monuments imbedded with noble truths and built to stand forever?
This wonderful rally put me in mind of some things one of my heroes, Robert Bork, wrote in his 1997 book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah. I will end with some cogent quotes.
“Perhaps the most promising development in our time is the rise of an energetic, optimistic, and politically sophisticated religious conservatism. It may prove more powerful than merely political or economic conservatism because religious conservatism’s objectives are cultural and moral as well.”
“Because it is a grass roots movement, the new religious conservatism can alter the culture both by electing local officials and school boards (which have greater effect on culture than do national politicians), and by setting a moral tone in opposition to today’s liberal relativism.”
“We may be witnessing a religious revival, another awakening.”
“It remains to be seen whether intellectual orthodoxy can stand firm against the current of radical individualism and radical egalitarianism.”
“Victory over modern liberalism will require a robust self-confidence about the worth of traditional values that the relativism of modern liberalism has already seriously damaged.”
We certainly saw a robust confidence in God’s timeless standard of goodness in a big way on that monumental day. It seems America is waking up. Hallelujah.
Postscript to Sol’s Report on Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally,
“A Monumental Day”: I Demand a Recount!
I am no expert at estimating the sizes of crowds, but some of the numbers I am hearing from newspeople and such are ridiculously low. Let me repeat: Steve and I got to the mall two hours early amidst a stream of people getting on the Metro ten stops out. Even then, the closest we could get to the Lincoln Memorial was about 100 yards from the World War II Memorial– that’s on the other end of the Reflecting Pool. I never even saw Glenn Beck or any of the speakers or performers in person. I only saw them on a JumboTron, the last one of six extending from the Lincoln Memorial, and the sound came about two seconds after the words were spoken. I repeat, there were so many people we could not get close enough to see anything in person and we were so far away the words we heard in no way matched up with what we were seeing. And compared to the entire crowd which extended all the way to the Washington Memorial and fanned way out across the path under the trees on the sides of the entire length of the Reflecting Pool, we felt we had primo seats, there were so very many more people behind us. A friend said she was stuck behind the Lincoln Memorial and didn’t get to see or hear a single thing. I would venture to say that most people there could not see anything; I don’t know how far people were able to hear. The thing was, we were all so eager and happy and grateful to be there, to be exercising our freedoms, and to be among such an overwhelming crowd of like-minded citizens.
I think the lies the newspeople are saying are making those of us who were there pretty angry. We came from all over the country at our own expense. How dishonest and hurtful to pretend that even a single one of us was not there.
There were a reported 250,000 people at Martin Luther King’s famous speech. Take a look at one of those photos. Now look at photos of the crowd at the rally last Saturday. Scroll down the page to see the photos. You can make your own estimation of the size of the crowd according to these photos. The reflecting pool is 4/10 of a mile long, and you get the correct perspective in areial photos, but it looks shorter in some of the long shots. And it is 7/10 of a mile from the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Memorial.
People must be having terrible problems with Glenn Beck’s rally because they are out and out lying about the numbers. They don’t want America to know what a HUGE success it was. This is a mistake because a nice-sized chunk of America was actually THERE.
Here is a time-lapse type video of the Restoring Honor Rally. It presents a 45-minute walk around the rally in a 6-minute video. It is actually thousands of individual pictures taken as she walked around, so you can pause the video anywhere and see the individual shots.
Why Should You Read Chased by an Elephant?
Take our Quiz
June 20, 2010
In Surprised by Joy C. S. Lewis wrote about "the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. You must find out why it went out of date," he said, "was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do? If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this one passes to the realization that our age is also ‘a period,’ and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions. They are likeliest to lurk in those wide-spread assumptions which are so ingrained in the age that no one dares to attack or feels it necessary to defend them.
"We are living in our own period with its own stark illusions. Our complacent, prosperous, techno-society has allowed God and His demands (i.e. traditional values) to be diluted and all but washed away in every public arena. Though it may be too little too late for a national retrenchment, for the sake of individual families and youth we at the Standard of Liberty are daring to attack some of the false and fashionable assumptions of our time. Just like Lewis said, these false assumptions are so ingrained that no one has to defend them anymore; people are just accepting them. But the truth is, if these bad trends, such as unneeded abortion, pornography, promiscuity, adultery, and homosexuality, were thought through and exposed, they would have no logical defense. To put it bluntly, these ideas and the practices that go with them, are terribly depraved. And yet, many of us are giving in to them by degrees through misinformation and intimidation, and in doing so are failing in our obligation to teach correct principles to the rising generation. Our appealing new book, Chased by an Elephant, The Gospel Truth About Today’s Stampeding Sexuality, outlines plain and precious truths that are rapidly sinking out of sight.
Take this quiz to determine to see if you and your family could benefit from our new book. Do your best to answer yes or no to the following questions:
Do you cringe even a little at the idea of absolute truths?
Do you believe men and women are interchangeable?
Do you think important ideal traditional gender roles are outdated?
Do you believe there are more human sexes than two: male and female?
Do you believe that healthy people have no control over their sexual thoughts and urges?
Do you wonder if or believe that individuals are born gay?
Do you support government legitimization of homosexuality?
Do you think individuals who declare they are the opposite sex their bodies and genes indicate should be publicly acknowledged and supported?
Do you think two people of the same sex can legitimately participate in the institution of marriage?
Do you believe that single parenting can be ideal and should be encouraged and legitimized?
Do you think that gay parenting can be ideal and should be publicly supported
?Do you think government should invent and give special rights, privileges, and protections to those who participate in same-sex sex and other alternatives to married monogamous heterosexuality?
Do you believe that homosexual behavior can be healthy and wholesome?
Do you agree with children being taught that gay is good in schools?
Do you have no problem with schools and others organizations aimed at teens supplying condoms, encouraging sexual activity, and encouraging/performing illegal abortion on minors without parental consent?
Do you support the idea of these organizations using public funds?
Do you support needless abortion as a female’s right?
Do you think that schools and government should override the rights of parents to teach their children about sex and sexuality?
Do you believe the Bible does not condemn sexual relations between people of the same sex?
Do you think that Christians should fall in with the culture concerning gay rights, at least to some degree?
Do you believe churches, church schools, and other church entities should be punished in some way for upholding their doctrines by openly speaking, teaching, or publishing against homosexuality, homosexual behavior, same-sex marriage, and gay parenting?
Do you support the government (laws, policies, judgments) favoring sexual freedom over religious freedom?
Do you feel that traditional Christianity in schools and government is at all out of place?
Do you believe that America’s Founding Fathers were motivated by greed and power?
Do you believe the Constitution to be a living document subject to casual and unwritten additions and interpretations in accordance with present culture, the sexual movement and other radical ideologies, special interest groups, or vocal minorities?
Do you think the idea of conspiracies (i.e. secret combinations) is alarmist fiction and those who believe in them are kooks and fanatics?
Do you believe Christ to be less of the demanding God and essential divine Redeemer of the Bible and Book of Mormon, and more of a philosophical and sociological leader that can fit nicely into our new, more peaceful and compassionate age?
Do you believe it is impossible to hate the sin and love the sinner?
Do you think you and/or others have pretty much "arrived" because of personal/family/church commitment/success/service, and therefore are not particularly needful of the grace of Christ’s Atonement?
Do you feel any hesitancy, discomfort, or lack of knowledge in talking with your children about their developing sexuality, God’s law of chastity, applying basic gospel principles, pornography, homosexuality, current events in our oversexed culture, etc.?
If you felt that any of the above questions deserved even a weak "yes," or if you felt unprepared to answer any of the questions at all, our Christ-centered book, Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality, can help. It is up to us in our particular time, with its particular illusions, to continually reject false principles and steer ourselves, our families, and our neighbors toward Christ, truth, and reality.
In fact, every family needs the information Chased contains. Readers are calling this book "wonderful," "essential," "enlightening and informative," "unthreatening," "highly readable and applicable," and ordering copies for their grown children busy raising young families. Click here to read glowing endorsements from a variety of professionals and experts. Order your copy from us now for $12.95 and free shipping. Order two or more and get them for $10.00 each and free shipping. Click here to order.
FYI, we have a publisher for another version of this book for the general Christian audience, (rather than just the LDS audience). It will be called Wild Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality, coming in the early fall.
Author Janice Graham is available for interviews, speaking engagements, and book signings. Call her at 801- 830-8417 or publisher Stephen Graham at 801-830-8418.
Chased by an Elephant Now Available
June 7, 2010
The Standard of Liberty Foundation is pleased to announce the release of Chased by an Elephant, The Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality by Janice Barrett Graham at Tidal Wave Books. LDS families will find that this appealing book, with its foundation on basic gospel principles, can open dialogue on important, sensitive, neglected, politically-charged, and constantly misrepresented topics. Graham employs images of overgrown jungles, wild elephants, and a young Tarzan and Jane to shed the light of truth on the reality of male and female, proper gender roles, the law of chastity, and God-given human sexuality.
Kieth Merrill, writer and director of Legacy and The Testaments, calls this book “a MUST READ for LDS parents, church leaders, and teens.” “It has the potential to make an elephant-sized difference,” says expert Dr. A. Dean Byrd. “There is no other book as engaging on sexual manners,” says Dawn Stefanowicz, author of Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting. “Teen pregnancy, STIs, and emotional heartache due to extra-marital sexual activity do not strike those who embrace chastity. . . . this book successfully guides [LDS] parents in imparting this virtue to their children,” says pediatrician Michelle A. Cretella, Chair of the Committee on Adolescent Sexuality. “In a time when sexual propaganda is directed at children, adolescents, and young people . . . . parents need this book. Their children need this information,” says Gayle Ruzicka, President of Utah Eagle Forum.
Author Janice Barrett Graham says, “To borrow a statement from C. S. Lewis, I wrote the book because this is ‘a subject that badly needed ventilating and the healthy view defending.’ Civilized people know that sexuality is serious business; if misused, somebody will get hurt. I am particularly dismayed at the lack of concern our culture and society at large show for its young in this area at such a time. We seem to stand idly by as children and teens are bombarded by bad information in schools and media and targeted and exploited by addicting internet pornography and organizations such as Planned Parenthood and GLSEN. In our licentious world where the sexual impulse is given preposterous emphasis, exemption, and privilege, the rising generation will not know the healthy, correct, and responsible attitudes to claim toward their developing sexual feelings unless knowing and caring adults (preferably parents) intentionally teach them. We adults give in to squeamishness or intimidation at the expense of young people’s agency, health, well-being, and future. For their sake, it’s high time to take a strong stand against destructive societal trends and for God’s unchanging boundaries for human sexuality. I certainly hope there will be many more and better faith-promoting books written on this subject.
”Chased by an Elephant (12.95) is now available to order on line at tidalwavebooks.com (free shipping), or amazon.com, through your bookstore, and soon in stores. Reviews can be posted on amazon and sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. Author Janice Graham is available for interviews, speaking engagements, and book signings. Call 801- 830-8417 or 801-830-8418. See this website for more information on runaway sexuality in our culture today.
Utah Liberalized Sex Education Bill Dies Silent Death
February 27, 2010
We want to report to you on the positive outcome of the misguided effort to liberalize Utah’s sex education law. The short story is that the bill died in committee. The Utah State PTA and Planned Parenthood had worked with legislators to write the bill. Planned Parenthood even sent an email calling it their bill and declaring victory. One of our friends sent us a copy of the email and you can read it here. We sent out an email encouraging all of you to call the members of the education committee and ask them to vote against the bill. After our email was sent out, we received emails and phone calls from PTA officers telling us how wrong we were, and that we should let them correct our understanding. We declined, and watched support for the bill erode as people found out what the bill really was about. Apparently many of you called and wrote, along with others from various groups. We hear that the legislators on the committee were flooded with calls, letters and emails over the weekend of Feb. 19-21. Some even went to the committee members’ homes to talk to them in person.
When the education committee met on February 22, the sponsor of the bill had prepared a new bill as a substitute for his original bill. Apparently he had received so much flak about it that he felt he needed to rewrite it. He presented the substitute bill for a motion to consider it in the committee, but not one of the legislators on the committee would even move that they take it up. No Republican or Democrat would look at the bill. The chairman of the committee, after eight minutes of silence, seeing no motion to take up the bill, then called for a motion to adjourn. He finally got that motion and the hearing was adjourned. Those on our side rejoiced. Those on the sex education liberalization side sat in stunned silence.
Afterward, we were told by some of the legislators on the committee that because of the overwhelming opposition to the bill they had received in calls and letters, they dared not vote for it. So, when the substitute bill was proposed, they just didn’t let it be heard. And that was that.
You can read the Deseret News article which reported on the hearing. If you wish, you may call committee members and thank them for letting the bill die. You can find their phone numbers on the email we sent, or in the article right below the Tony Perkins report.
Our thanks to all who took the time to call or write.
Now, here’s another story you should know about. Tony Perkins Dis-invited to Give Patriotic Speech at Air Base Luncheon
Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Counsel, was invited to give a patriotic talk to a voluntary prayer luncheon at Andrews Air Force Base. In another speech Perkins had expressed support for the current law which makes homosexuals ineligible for service in the military. After being told of that speech, the Andrews Air base chaplains’ office rescinded the invitation for Perkins to speak. They said his ideas were incompatible for military members who serve the President, and that some who had planned to attend were “uncomfortable.” So, now if you speak in favor of existing law which supports traditional sexual morality and happens to be opposed by the President, you are uninvited to speak at a voluntary prayer luncheon. Read the Washington Times article. Also, you can read the AFA blog post by Bryan Fischer. Some say they are going to contact the Andrews Air Force Base public relations office to complain, call for an investigation, and to demand that Tony Perkins be re-invited to speak. If you wish to make your voice heard you can call the base operator at 301-981-1110 and ask for public affairs. They will take your call and report your concerns.
Sex Education Amendments bill liberalizes Utah's sex education law February 6, 2010
If you live in Utah, here’s something you can do to support traditional moral values being taught in our schools. Call the members of the Senate Education Committee and ask them to vote against the bill S.B. 54, Health Education Amendments.Utah’s current sex education law requires school districts to teach an abstinence-based or abstinence-only curriculum. Teachers are not allowed to get into details of contraception or sexual techniques, nor advocate homosexuality.You should know Utah is in 45th place for teen pregnancies (it would be 49th place if they didn’t count married teens, such as 19-year-olds) and 50th place for sexually transmitted diseases among teens. But you wouldn’t it know from listening to the bill’s supporters, who say we are in a crisis situation relative to teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. What the bill does is require all school districts in Utah to provide "comprehensive" sex education. Beware of the word comprehensive; it means they teach all types of sex as morally equivalent, including homosexuality. It also means your children will be taught all about sexuality and contraception. The especially bad part of the bill is the devious opt-out provision. That means students will automatically be taught the comprehensive sex curriculum unless parents sign a document to opt their students out of the teaching. School administrators know that most parents won’t opt out, so they are pretty confident they will be able to indoctrinate most students in their liberal sexual ideologies. This bill essentially throws out our current law which supports traditional moral values. Click here to read the text of the bill.
Listed below are the members of the Senate Education Committee. We urge you to call one or all and ask them to vote against S.B. 54, Health Education Amendments. The phone number for the Senate is (801) 538-1035. Just call and ask for the Senator by name and they will connect you to his or her office.
Sen. Curtis S. Bramble, Chair
Sen. Margaret Dayton
Sen. Brent H. Goodfellow
Sen. Lyle W. Hillyard
Sen. Scott K. Jenkins
Sen. Karen W. Morgan
Sen. Howard A. Stephenson
Experience shows that phone calls from constituents are effective in influencing some legislators’ votes. So, please make that call and let your voice be heard.
Stephen & Janice Graham on K-Talk Radio Stephen & Janice Graham discussed the proposed revision of Utah's sex education statute, and their next book, Chased by an Elephant: The Gospel Truth About Today's Stampeding Sexuality. Click here to listen to the 40-minute podcast of the 1-23-2010 radio program
Salt Lake City Anti-discrimination Ordinance Is A Step On The Slippery Slope
For immediate release. November 11, 2009
Stephen Graham, President of Standard of Liberty, released the following statement on the Salt Lake City Anti-discrimination ordinance passed by the city council on November 10, 2009.
"Standard of Liberty opposes the new Salt Lake City anti-discrimination ordinance It is misguided and just plain wrong. It essentially adds “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the list of the usual items upon which unlawful discrimination decisions are based.
They say it’s not about the gays and lesbians, but it actually is, or they would not have used the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” A city committee "studied" and “found” that only one group was being discriminated against - GLBT. So, yes it is about the gays and lesbians. The committee was looking for examples of discrimination based on people’s sexuality, and sure enough, they found what they were looking for. And “fairness” demanded that the discrimination be remedied.
“Sexual orientation” and “Gender Identity” are bogus concepts. They were only recently devised to legitimize perverse sexual inclinations and activities and make them equivalent to God-given, proper sexuality. They say everyone has a “sexual orientation”and a “gender identity.” But to accept that idea is to accept the idea that any approach to sexuality is normal and natural, that there are any number of sexual approaches, that nothing is inappropriate, and that there is no ideal sexuality. Anything that provides the slightest accommodation and encouragement of sexuality gone wrong is detrimental to the people involved and to society as a whole.
This is indeed a slippery slope. To pass this ordinance is governmental recognition, acceptance, accommodation and protection of an extortion of appropriate sexuality that has been recognized and understood as perverse for millenia. Only in the last few decades has homosexualism made progress in overturning the understanding of the ages. After this ordinance is in place for a time will come pressure to give governmental and societal recognition to those involved in perverse sexual relationships - civil unions or domestic partnerships or whatever name they choose. After that comes the push to just go ahead and give those relationships marriage-like societal and governmental advantages - even though they do not benefit society. The benefit that marriage provides civil society is the reason for encouraging marriage by giving advantages to those involved in marriage. Then, when we're used to those marriage-like relationships, they will insist that all such relationships should be included in marriage. So, yes the new ordinance is a step down the slippery slope in the subverting of our culture. To say it is not a threat to marriage is to deny the facts and to ignore the ulterior motives of homosexualists.
It is not a matter of rights. It’s a matter of right vs. wrong. There is no constitutional right to a specific home or a specific job. This may sound harsh, but there is actually no right to have a roof over your head, nor is there a right to work without being discriminated against. Discrimination happens all the time in housing and employment. If one wants a particular house, but can’t afford it, or doesn’t have the proper credit rating, for example, the seller won’t let the buyer have the house. That’s discrimination. The buyer doesn’t have the right to that house, so he goes and finds another one. A person’s job may require that they wear a certain style of clothing in the place of business, say casual business clothes. But what if the person prefers to wear jeans and a t-shirt? That’s discrimination. If he doesn’t like the dress code, he can find another job. He doesn’t have a right to that job. But sexual activists want to have their way, and think they do have a right to anything they want, solely based on the sex they practice. There is no guarantee of happiness, only the right to pursue happiness. Things may not work out the way you want; life is tough. So, toughen up and get on with it.
The federal government has decided that unlawful discrimination involves race, color, religion, sex and national origin. If Salt Lake City wants everyone to be protected from discrimination, then say “everyone,” don’t single out sexuality as a basis for your protection. By doing so you are actually admitting that you aren’t about everyone, only those of a particular sexuality.
No one of natural male-female sexual attraction would ever complain of being discriminated against in housing or employment. Only one who is blatantly activist about their sexual perversions would ever publicly disclose matters concerning their private sexual activities.
People suffering from GLBT troubles do not need governmental accommodation and special protections, they need help in overcoming their flawed sexual propensities. Neither homosexuality, bisexualism, multigenderism, transgenderism, nor any -ism perversion of appropriate sexuality should ever be the basis of special protections by the government. They should be encouraged to get help.
As Judge Robert Bork has said, when incompatible ideas compete in society, one will be favored and one will be harmed. The Salt Lake City mayor and city council have not done the great good they were proclaiming the new ordinance will accomplish. They have actually done great harm. Standard of Liberty calls on them to rescind the ordinance, and also calls on the state legislature to resist the inevitable pressure to follow Salt Lake City's actions."
--Stephen Graham, email@example.com
Dr. Dan Reviews No Going Back No Going Back By Jonathan Langford, Zarahelma Books (2009) Reviewed by Daniel E. Byrne, Ph. D.
October 15, 2009
This book was forwarded to me for review. The endorsers, none of whom appear to have any credentials in human sexuality, child or gender development include: Gerald Argetsinger, associate professor of performing arts, Rochester Institute of Technology, former artistic director of the LDS Church's Hill Cumorah Pageant; Ty Mansfield coauthor of In Quiet Desperation:Understanding the Challenge of Same-GenderAttraction (Deseret Book, 2004); William Morris, founder of the Mormon arts and culture blog A Motley Vision; Linda Hunter Adams, former director of the BYU Humanities Publications Center, past president of the Association of Mormon Letters; Clark Draney, associate professor of English, College of Southern Idaho; Rex Goode, social worker and webmaster for Latter-Day Sexual Recovery; Thomas F. Rogers, playwright and BYU professor emeritus; Steven C Walker, BYU English professor.
After a careful reading of the book, I decided that it was not deserving of a formal review because it was not the "realistic novel" purported by the publisher--not even close to the claimed "mirror" needed by society. Rather the book is a political treatise, which seems based on the author’s ideology, an ideology tainted with gay activism directed at children and adolescents.
"Gay" children and adolescents do not exist---only frightened children who experience gender confusion. Even labeling children "gay" sexualizes them---an egregious error in the grandest proportion. Further, good science has determined that such labels lead to sexual experiences as well as depression and suicidality.
Both the author and the publisher seem as unsophisticated in what science can and cannot say about homosexuality as they are steeped in gay activism as highlighted by framing the entire book around GSA school clubs (which are instigated by GLSEN) and the rhetoric of PFLAG.
What is even more disturbing is that this assault on children is viewed as some kind of compassion as they (the author and publisher) seem to solicit parents and church leaders as their accomplices. What mother would tease her gender-confused son with notions that he might bring a boyfriend home? What bishop would encourage or permit a 15 year-old boy who has had sexual involvement with another boy and who has engaged in masturbation and homosexual pornography to "counsel" with a 12 year-old, gender-confused young boy? And alone!
And the publisher's agenda? The publisher thinks that the Church's stand on homosexuality places it "in future danger of being ruined just like it would have been ruined had we continued with polygamy." The homosexuality-polygamy analogy has never worked, and frankly it's a bit worn. Still, the publisher feels a need to admonish the Brethren. He concludes, "On gay issues, we need to take as soft an approach as we can without losing our identity."
Certainly, The Family: A Proclamation to the World, is anything but soft--it's a bold statement for all to hear on the importance of gender and the proper role of sexuality in the lives of all of God's children.
Perhaps the best way to review this book is to allow the quotes to speak for themselves.
Therefore, below I have cited quotes directly from the book with a few comments in parentheses. In addition, I have bolded selected quotes to highlight the author/publisher's activist agenda.
Page 1, first sentence: “Paul had no intention of telling Chad that he was gay.” (Paul is an adolescent! No adolescent knows who he or she is. Everything is fluid, especially sexuality.)
Page 2. “Paul had absolutely had no romantic feelings about Chad.”
Page 4. “Shut up, you faggot!” Chad roared.” (Such statements are dispersed throughout the book to set up the homophobia argument.)
Page 7. “Paul’s a fag. My best friend is a faggot. So what are you gonna do about it?”
Page 11. “A lot of gays say they’re born that way. I don’t know. I can’t believe God would create someone gay. But then, I can’t believe that God would create someone handicapped or psychopathic, either.” (This makes a case for the born-that-way argument by first creating a question and then adding "evidence" that does not support the question. It's not so dissimilar from the same-sex marriage argument where an individual will say that marriage should be between a man and a woman but same-sex couples should be allowed to be married, too!)
Page 13. “Dad, I’m gay.” “Dad, I got a girl pregnant.” “Dad, I blew up a school.”
Page 33. “Let’s look it up in For the Strength of Youth” bit. You know, just to make sure I knew, absolutely one hundred percent, that having sex with guys is not allowed.”
Page 37. “But you do get crushes on boys …” “Mom! Just some of the guys at school, okay . . . “ You want to surprise your mom when you bring home your first boy friend.”
Page 38. “But when I’m lonely and wish there was some one I could be with to make the loneliness go away, it’s guys that I think about.” (This is a classical case of a young boy who is struggling with gender issues--not sexual ones. He is concerned about gender---what it means to be a boy.)
Page 40. “Paul, blushing, admitted that he’d noticed some boys were cute back in seventh grade. He had not realized what it meant, though, until eighth grade health class.” (His eighth grade health class interpreted his attractions for him with a questionaire?) “Maybe she should have stayed together with Frank. Having a dad in the home might have helped. As soon as she thought it though, her mind rebelled. That’s not theway it works, Barbara you know that.”
“Paul would have a hard life. A lot of things he said he wanted---mission, family, activity in the Church---would be possible only if he could ignore some of his own deepest instincts.” (Such statements are typically made to engender sympathy while at the same time, making a case for homosexuality being hard-wired, i. e., "deepest instincts.")
Page 43. “You totally should come to GSA. It’s all about tolerance, which is a goodthing." (GSA is not about tolerance---it's about indoctrination---clearly observable throughout this book.)
Page 47. “Somehow, Paul had wound up on the committee to do posters about AIDS statistics and safe behavior.” (Where sexual behavior is concerned, there is no such thing as "safe" behavior—the only safe behavior is abstinence.)
Page 48. “…couple of pen pals he’d picked up at a gay-teen website.”
Page 49. “He was gay and they were gay---or rather, some were gay and the rest were gay-friendly.”
Page 50. “Girls think it’s a compliment when a boy thinks they’re cute, even if it’s not someone they want to go out with. I don’t see why guys can’t treat it the same way.”
Page 51. “Apparently one of the club leaders had a list of gay-related events in the Portland area… Paul felt more comfortable jumping in this time…he was a member of the group… Paul felt so good about GSA that he decided it would be a good time to let his mom know. So that evening at the dinner, he introduced the topic…it’s okay mom. Nobody knows I’m gay.” (Inviting an adolescent who is experiencing gender confusion to participate in gay-related events is inexcusable.)
Page 61. “ Reading about depression and suicide rates, the risk of AIDs, and other challenges facing gay teens…the reality of having a gay son had not sunk in.”
“Barbara flipped over the brochure. On the back was stamped an announcement for a local support group for parents, family and friends of gays and lesbians. I guess if they have a club at school for supporting gay kids, it makes sense that they’d have organizations for family members as well.”
Page 68. “Paul liked going to GSA. He liked the people---well a lot of them any way… And Paul had something in common with them, or a lot of them, at least---being gay. He liked being around other people who shared that part of himself, even if they didn’t know he was that way.” (Gay is a part of who he is?)
Page 77. Regarding the PFLAG group, “…seemed to be talking about ways that homosexuals and lesbians could be accepted better by society. No one seemed to have a problem with the idea that their children were that way…”
Page 81. “But I do know what it is like to have a son-in-law, someone I have come to love like my son call me in tears to say that he’s gay and he and my daughter will be getting a divorce because he can’t live a lie anymore.”
Page 83. “Yeah, sure he’s gay. Big deal.”
Page 92. “The world’s full of gay people… Portland is full of gay people. Sometimes it seems like half the people I work with are gay people…”
Page 95. “So I guess it’s a sign of equality that there’s a gay dating reality program on TV. So we should be happy about it.”
Page 102. “Paul squeezed lightly and felt Jake’s arm tighten in response. Slowly, the other boy lowered his forehead until it was resting against Paul’s shoulder. Feeling Jake tremble against him, Paul experienced a sudden surge of---affection, or maybe protectiveness—toward him.
It wasn’t until then that Paul noticed his own erection. It didn’t seem to him that what he was feeling had very much to do with sex, though. Instead, it just seemed like a natural side effect of being close to someone. Another boy…”
Page 105. “You’re gay—you want a boyfriend, don’t you?”(Blatant propaganda.)
Page 106. “Denying who you are. Trying not to be gay when you are gay.” (Blatant propaganda.)
Page 108. “The way I see it marriage is this kind of a bargain. Guys get sex, and womenget help raising kids.”
“So why do you come to GSA anyway, if you think you’re so much better than all the other gay kids there?”
“But you think being gay is wrong and everyone else should pretend they aren’t gay the way you are trying to do.”
Page 108.“As for why I came to GSA---At first it was because I was curious, and because you dragged me out. I kept on coming because you’re my friends.”(This section could be labeled the seduction of young men by GSA's. A young gender confused, curious boy is dragged to GSA and finds "friends," who encourage him to accept a gay identity--such labels encourage acting out--and an older boy does the initiation into the world of homosexual behavior.)
Page 112. “Fine. Anyway, welcome to the warm and confidential enfolding arms of GSA, as Ms. Allington never fails to remind us. You planning to come out to the whole school?’
“So you are really gay.”
“I don’t think anybody’s asked me that before. Well, except my mother, when I told her,”
“How did she take it?”
“She was great. Even started teasing me about cute boys.”
Page 113.“Whatever floats your boat. It’s like…some gay guys are cross-dressers. You know, they like to dress up like girls. …But hell it’s their thing, so whatever…” (Misguided tolerance—whatever makes you feel good.)
Page 114. “So GSA helps you feel more comfortable with who you are.”
“Yeah. The non-Mormon parts at least. It’s a relief, getting to spend time around people where I am not a weirdo, just because I’m attracted to guys.”
Page 115.“If the damn faggots would just keep their dicks out of each other’s butts therewouldn’t be any AIDs.”(pornographic, shock value—building a case for homophobia.)
“Geez you are ignorant.”
Page 117. “There is a word for people like you….homophobic.”
Page 118. “I thought I had this really cool, tolerant friend. But I don’t. He was just faking it.”(The message is, if you do not accept everything I do, then you can’t accept me.)
Page 119. “I don’t care about character development either. Just so long as the guys are hot.”
Page 120. “You asked one time what I get out of GSA. It’s this kind of thing. Being able to sit around and talk about, you know which guys I think are hot, just like its normal.”
(A purpose of a school club?)
Page 124. “And what did you expect, when you agreed to look at porn with Jared?”
Page 126. “Bit by bit, the story came out” (the beginning of the grooming process).
Page 127. How Paul had started spending time with Jared, a junior he’d met in the gay-straight club at school….they’d been over at Jared’s house, looking at some pictures of hot guys…then he asked if I wanted to look at some porn…and things had proceeded from there…had hands gone underneath clothes? Um, yeah. Had the other boy’s hands touched Paul’s sex organs? Yes. Had it happened again?
Page 128. “Yeah, I think it’s going to happen again.”
“And suddenly in his mind’s eye [Richard the bishop] he saw a different scene. Paul, head still down shaking the bishop’s hand and walking out of his office. Paul going into the house where he and his mother lived. Paul opening the medicine cabinet in the bathroom, pouring pills from a bottle into his open hand, swallowing again and again…” (A misinformed bishop misses the notion that such behavior is associated with labeling.)
Page 133.“I did stuff with Jared, that guy from GSA….”Geez Paul! What the fuh—I mean, why the hell did you do that”…’Cause I was dumb. And horny.”
Page 135. “At one point Jared had stuck his hands down Paul’s pants. He worried for a minute that he might have gone too far, but the other boy hadn’t objected.”
Page 143. “To her surprise, she realized that the two of them being together in a closed room didn’t bother her. I guess I really do know that Paul isn’t going to turn my son gay.”(More "evidence" for biology---individuals can’t be influenced to engage in homosexual activity—that’s just the way they are?)
Page 144. “Look, you don’t have any friends that’re gay besides the people you know in GSA, right?”
Page 148. “GSA isn’t just about being gay. It’s just…a group that’s about treating people right. Like putting a stop to bullying, and not disrespecting other people just because they’re different.”
Page 158. “Students who participate are silent all day to protest the silencing of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people.”
Page 160. “The church tells me I can’t be happy if I do stuff with other guys. Most of the people of GSA would say I can’t be happy unless I follow my feelings.”
“He tried not to think about it, but that stuff had felt really, really good while it was happening.”(The author fails to understand that a physiological response to sexual stimulation simply means that your body is working; it makes no judgement on the behavior.)
Page 165. “ … Barbara supposed that as a Mormon, she ought to be horrified by the thought of two men or two women marrying. Really, though, she found it hard to work up much indignation about the issue . . . it really didn’t seem any stranger than teenagers with eyebrow piercings and blue hair… Part of her was simply happy that gays would have the opportunity to be in relationships that were acknowledged by society.” (Homosexual behavior is not really a moral issue---it’s kind of like blue hair and eyebrow piercings?)
Page 167. “Over the years, Richard [the bishop] had become convinced---from his observations and from hearing some gays talk about their relationships—that there was real, true love in some homosexual relationships.” (The bishop might want to read from "True to the Faith"---where The First Presidency declares that homosexuality "distorts loving relationships and prevents people from receiving blessings that can be found in family life and the saving ordinances of the gospel.")
Page 168. “”And we can truly see the signs of the times and the hold that Satan has upon the people, just like the days of Sodom and Gomorrah.”
“Really, Trevor you need to get at least one guy interested in you before you start fantasizing about orgies.”
Page 176. “…Paul had learned how to navigate through gym showers and getting dressed without letting his gaze---or his mind---linger on the naked bodies around him.”
Page 185. “It’s one thing to accept and be sympathetic about the boy’s efforts to live a gospel life….It’s another thing to accept homosexuality itself…homosexuality is a perversion. The more space and sympathy we give it, the more we treat it like a normal part of everyday life, something you can talk about openly in a club at high school no less, the more ground we yield up to Satan You don’t go any good to your young man if you water down the message of the Lord and his prophets and the scriptures on the subject.”
Page 186. (The bishop ignores the above counsel from his father-in-law, reasoning that the young man “didn’t need to hear that he was evil or wrong or perverted.")
Page 195. “It’s all about tolerance and acceptance, speaking out so other people don’t have to suffer in silence.” (No, it’s about indoctrination. It’s about intimidating those with whom you disagree. It’s about acceptance of a lifestyle.)
Page 197. “Everyone thinks about the times their own group was persecuted. No one likes to admit that persecution happens to other groups as well. At least, not to groups they don’t like.” (Another assault on the Church with a comparison between the early days of the Church's persecution and the "acceptance of homosexuality.")
“Everyone who claims to be participating in the Day of Silence will receive a zero for class participation today if I see you talking here or anywhere else in the school.” (Forcing the Day of Silence and persecuting those who do not follow some preconceived expectation.)
Page 201. “…Mrs. Alder seemed offended that most of them weren’t observing the Day of Silence. She spent the whole time talking about persecution and intolerance and AIDS and how homosexuals had been an oppressed minority in Western Civilization.”
Page 217. “…I know that’s the way I am, and I know it’s probably not going to change in this life.” (More propaganda---the message is “you are born gay.”)
Page 218. “I think we are all concerned about this choice you’re making to please your family and your church by trying to change who you are.” (The message is “you are born gay.”)
Page 221. “Yeah! Paul’s such a perfect Mormon, he doesn’t want to get involved. Doesn’t want everyone to know that he’s a faggot too, just like he was telling us at GSA two weeks ago.”
Page 233. “So what about fags? Gays, I mean? Are they allowed to serve missions?”
“Whether someone is attracted to other males or to females is irrelevant, if they’re worthy to go on a mission.”
Page 246. “Not that I’m certain I’ll be able to get married anyway. What with being gay and all.”
Page 247. “Patriarchal blessing….no mention of kids or being married.”
“It’s a fag couple I see… don’t bend over he’ll…”
Page 260. “So what’s this about you being homosexual?...Hesitantly, Paul admitted that he was attracted to guys…But I am committed to following my church’s teaching. That means not living a homosexual lifestyle…but you are part of the gay-straight club at school….That isn’t about being homosexual. It’s about being tolerant.” (The beginning of an attack on the Boy Scouts.)
Page 261. “…horrible campout when he was thirteen and had gotten diarrhea. He’d run out of underpants and Chad had loaned him an extra pair. Later, he’d found out that Chad wasn’t wearing any himself. When Paul called him a pervert, he shrugged, ‘I kind of like it,’ he’d said. Maybe I’ll go like this from now on.”
“You don’t think people’ll think is weird for a seventh grader to be stripping in the bathroom? People can see under the stalls, you know. And what if someone sees you carrying your underpants around in your backpack?”
Page 262. “They didn’t pass me…Cause I’m known to be a homosexual. That makes me a bad example of Boy Scout values.”(Continuing attack on the Boy Scouts).
Page 262. “”I’m not a good example of the Boy Scouts. Because people know I’m gay and because I was involved with the GSA.”
Page 266. “The scout oath says that boys have a duty to be physically strong mentally awake, and morally straight. Boy Scouts of America takes the position that being morally straight means not homosexual. That’s a position the Mormon Church has always supported. Seems pretty odd for a Mormon to be asking for an exception to that rule.” (An attack on both the Boy Scouts and the Mormon Church.)
Page 268. “They didn’t want me. Just because I am attracted to guys.”
Page 269. “I am like ten seconds from calling the paramedics if you don’t hand over that fuh---that damn pill bottle.”
Page 271. A 12 year-old boy is now introduced and he tells the bishop, “I’m gay…like Paul.” The boy had read “For the Strength of Youth and the part about same-gender attraction.”
In response to the bishop’s inquiry “What makes you think you might be same-gender attracted,” the 12-year old boy responds, “”I—um, get all horny when I see boys who aren’t wearing shirts and stuff, like when we play shirts and skins with capture the flag. Or when I go swimming. And I think about boys when, I uh …masturbate.”
Page 275. “Ever since that day in second grade when he came home talking about how cute one of the other boys was, and then we got a note from the teacher asking us to explain to him that most boys don’t like to be kissed by other boys.” (More propaganda for being born homosexual.)
“Is there…any kind of treatment the Church offers, to help people with same-gender attraction?”
Page 276.” Not really, no. LDS Family Services sometimes offers counseling for people dealing with same-sex attraction, but there is no specific program endorsed by the Church.”
(The bishop decides to have Paul talk to the 12-year old boy about same-gender attraction!)
Page 281. The 12-year old boy admits to Paul, “…I mean, here I already kinda had a crush on you and everything.”
“And I really don’t want my friends to hate me or to get beat up and killed like that guy I Wyoming…”
Page 286.”The other boy seemed nervous. ‘I’m not gay. I don’t have anything against gays. But I’m uh, having enough problems without everyone thinking I’m gay on top of it. So I’d really appreciate it if you, like, wouldn’t sit by me, okay.”
“Speaking of Jose did you hear about him?...I guess he went to some kind of religious camp over the summer. First week back, he shows up at GSA and says that all us fags are going to hell.”
Page 288. “And he seemed generally…listless. Subdued. Almost like he’d been before starting the antidepressants.”
Page 289. “If Paul was still in GSA, they could be a support system for him. But he is not.” (The GSA has done enough damage to Paul with their "support.")
“It was ironic. He’d quit GSA because of his commitment as a member of the Church. But now apparently he wasn’t welcome among the other kids his age at church either.”
Page 291. “ I would have told the missionary committee that you’ve overcome great challenges to be able to serve a mission. I would have said you were one of the most spiritually aware young men I’ve had the privilege to know. I would have mentioned your sense of humor and the way you have of making other people feel at ease…I would have said that I’d be proud to consider you my son.”
Page 296. “I hate them. I hate them for what they did. I hate them for making it so Paul couldn’t stand to live here anymore.”
This political treatise is neither about nor for children. Rather, it appears that adults are trying to recapture memories from their own childhoods, narratives that are laced with activism disguised as compassion. Such pornographic images as noted in many of the bolded statements are not statements from children: they are statements from adults who sexualize children. The author and publisher are horrifically misinformed---children are not gay---gender development is just that---gender development. Nothing is fixed in children or adolescents--especially sexuality is not fixed. And children are NOT homophobic!
Though distress in a child's life can indeed be problematic, such distress, unless it is extreme and repetitive, does not lead to depression and suicide but labeling does. Research has demonstrated that each year that an adolescent postpones the gay label reduces suicidal attempts by 20%, and the labeling comes from GSA clubs---under the banner of tolerance.
Interestingly enough, the book describes a near-case book study of the development of homosexuality in a boy. From the father-absent boy, to a father-surrogate bishop who cannot even provide resources to a young man, to overinvolved women---a mother who encourages her gender-confused son to have "boy friends," to the mother-surrogate GSA advisor and teacher who insist that this young boy come out of the closet and admit he's gay and participate in a day of silence. And the peer abuse is horrible. Such relationships have been repeatedly documented in the scientific literature as risk factors for the development of homosexual attractions.
Does Paul have homosexual attractions because he's hardwired to be gay or do his attractions, with the help of his "friends" cause him to label himself gay? There is no evidence that homosexuality is hardwired.
The adults in this book need as much help as does Paul. This young man is confused about his gender development---which is typical for many young men, particularly those who are fatherless, either physically or emotionally fatherless. A father or caring male surrogate would be a valuable resource in helping this young man navigate developmental milestones.
The message of hope and help is lost on both the author and the publisher. Both seem ignorant about what it means to be a boy---gender development. Perhaps their own developmental experiences have blinded them to the spiritual truth found in The Family Proclamation that "Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."
Hopefully, the activism in this book will not go unrecognized. The not-so-disguised attacks on the Boy Scouts, on the Church, and on individuals who disagree with homosexuality are blatant. And the notion that there are no resources to help with children who struggle with gender issues is simply a lie.
The author and the publisher should feel a sense of shame for this assault on children. Labeling a little one "gay"is nothing short of child abuse---spiritual child abuse. There is not only hope and help for children who struggle with gender identity issues but the outcomes are very positive (Zucker, Bradley, Rekers and others.)
The book is reminiscent of the days of Korihor. One author boldly stated of our times: Korihor is not only back, but this time he has a printing press. Such seems to be the case with this book.
Dr.. Dan is an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a medical/social scientist and a licensed mental health professional. You may submit questions by sending an email to Dr.Dan@standardofliberty.org.
To comment on this review and read SoL's review go to our SoL Blog.
Capturing Children's Minds
Candi Cushman, Focus on the Family Education Analyst
Can we really afford to teach the next generation that there is nothing distinctive or beneficial about having a mother and a father?
What better way to capture a child’s imagination than with a heart-warming story about cute, fuzzy little animals?
That’s the latest tactic homosexual-advocacy groups are using in their efforts to reach the youngest minds in our public school system.
Whether it’s stories about penguins, guinea pigs or even elephants, they’ve figured out how to use fun anecdotes about animals to familiarize children as young as preschool with the idea of homosexuality and gay "marriage."
After all, they know if they can capture the hearts and minds of the young, they can permanently change the culture.
Take, for instance, what’s happening to parents in Alameda, Calif. Despite the fact that the state’s highest court upheld Prop. 8 — a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman — the school board brazenly mandated a pro-gay curriculum for elementary kids. It told parents they cannot opt their kids out of this teaching — even if it contradicts their most deeply held religious convictions. Or even if they happen to think their kids are too young to psychologically handle sexual topics.
The curriculum defines family as “a group of people living together and functioning as a single household.” First-graders are introduced to this concept through a storybook called "Who’s in a Family?" featuring images of same-sex couples interspersed with pictures of animals, including an all-male elephant herd depicted as another type of family. In the second grade, the kids will listen to "And Tango Makes Three," a story about two male penguins who supposedly fall in love and hatch a baby chick.
But let’s think carefully about this. Can we really afford to teach the next generation that there is nothing distinctive or particularly beneficial about having a mother and a father? That a family is nothing more than a group of individuals — no more unique than a herd of elephants in the jungle?
Haven’t we already reaped enough of the consequences of cheapening the value of the traditional family and of man-woman marriage in this society?
But the latest news is that we’ve moved beyond penguins to guinea pigs: There’s a new book cropping up in elementary classrooms called "Uncle Bobby’s Wedding." For kids as young as 4, the book shows two male guinea pigs wearing bow ties, celebrating their "wedding."
And if you assume this is just a problem in California, think again. The nation’s largest homosexual-advocacy group, the Human Rights Campaign, is piloting a pro-gay curriculum, “Welcoming Schools,” in several elementary classrooms across the land. It radically redefines the meaning of marriage and family.
The Obama administration has just appointed one of the nation’s most radical gay activists — Kevin Jennings, founder of GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network — to a senior staff position in the U.S. Department of Education. So expect this sort of thing to be coming soon to a school near you.
So what can we do about it? It’s much easier to be proactive and protect your local schools than it is to get something out once it’s inside the system. So the first thing we can do is learn lessons from recent events in Alameda and elsewhere in the nation about what red flags to look for:
Lesson 1: Watch out for school programs with innocent-sounding titles like “family diversity,” “safe schools” or “tolerance.” Many of these programs contain homosexuality components. By categorizing pro-gay teaching within a subject like “family diversity” or “social justice,” school officials often try to skirt parental control. They argue that since this teaching is categorized as a social issue — and not labeled as sex education — they no longer have to give parents prior notice and/or the ability to exempt their children from the class. You have the right to ask to see lesson plans. And if you find there’s a problem, don’t be afraid to mobilize other parents to take action.
Lesson 2: Beware of so-called anti-discrimination or anti-bullying laws that spell out special categories like “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.” In Alameda, the school board used such provisions to justify an end-run around the state’s marriage laws. Despite what gay activists claim, your school doesn’t have to add these sexualized categories. It’s possible to implement a strong anti-bullying policy that prohibits any harassment against any child for any reason, without adding special categories that politicize and sexualize the school environment.
Lesson 3: Make your voice heard! As a parent and/or taxpaying community citizen, you have more of a vested interest in what happens in your local public schools than special-interest groups do. Don’t be afraid to speak up. Focus on the Family has made it easy for you to do so through TrueTolerance.org.
The site is filled with information from national legal experts, examples of pro-gay lesson plans that cross the line and fact-based counterpoints to the one-sided messages gay-advocacy groups frequently give public school officials. Much of this is compiled into a professional packet that you can e-mail to your school officials from the “Take Action” section of the True Tolerance site.
An estimated 90 percent of school-age children are in public schools. If we care about the future of this country, we can’t afford to turn a blind eye to what’s happening in those schools. So let’s speak up — while there’s still time to do something about it.
Watch a special Turn Signal video report on gay-activist Kevin Jennings, who has been named to a senior staff position in the Department of Education.
--Published with permission of Focus on the Family, Sept 26, 2009.
Let Your Voice Be Heard
August 30, 2009
Last week I received an email and a phone call telling me about a Town Hall Meeting being held the next day by Utah State Representative Lynn Hemingway to garner public support for his bill that would liberalize Utah’s sex-education curriculum. His proposed changes would open the door to condom demonstrations and other things not appropriate in a classroom of minors, including discussions of homosexual sex (sodomy).
I did some internet research, printed some documentation, rearranged my schedule and attended the meeting, which was also attended by the local press and TV, along with about 30 other people. I got to the library early and was there when the Channel 4 reporter Mark Zinni arrived. I introduced myself and he interviewed me for 1-2 minutes. Click here to see me on Channel 4's coverage.
When the meeting started, I learned it was actually sponsored by the local Planned Parenthood (PP) office. Their spokesman conducted the meeting. She stated that there is empirical evidence that abstinence education has been an utter failure wherever it has been tried, using Utah state’s teen pregnancy statistic as her local proof. She also said comprehensive sex education (their name for the new program they want in the schools) has been highly successful in reducing pregnancy and new cases of STIs (sexually transmitted infections, what we used to call venereal diseases and later called STDs, sexually transmitted diseases, which I guess they were uncomfortable calling diseases, hence the latest politically correct acronym STIs). She turned the time over to Rep. Hemingway. He indicated the pregnancy statistic, along with one indicating an increase in clamydia, were proof that we needed to be giving our children more sex information through the schools. He said parents would be able to opt their children out of the explicit sexuality and contraception discussions, but that there were just too many kids who needed this sexual information, and that teachers would be able to volunteer graphic sex talk as well as respond to questions. Hemingway told of families where both parents worked 2 or 3 jobs, who, when they got home were just too tired to talk to their kids about sex. PP spoke up, indicating that, yes, many parents are just not doing their job, so we need to have this expansion of information in the schools. She also said PP is the largest provider of sexual counseling services in the state, and all because parents aren’t doing their job. I learned they had worked with Rep. Hemingway in drafting the proposed bill, modeled after one they claim to be highly successful in North Carolina. Hemingway then indicated he was there for community input and invited comment.
One young woman told of how she just couldn’t talk to her parents and was so very grateful for having someone like PP to talk to, and would have loved to be able to talk to her teacher. A mother told of children coming home talking about the sex stuff they learned in class, which was the first the mother had heard of it, and would have taken her kids out of the class had she known what was to be discussed. She would rather there were no sex education in schools at all. Another protested the term “protected sex,” saying even “protected sex” is not safe. One local PTA officer said she thought the statistics might be skewed by a recent influx of people from California, who already had the diseases, or were pregnant.
And so it went until I felt I should make my thoughts known. I am paraphrasing, but here is what I said:
My name is Stephen Graham and I am the father of 7 children, and also represent the Standard of Liberty Foundation with more than 7,000 like-minded people on our mailing list. I am reminded of something attributed to Mark Twain, who said no one is safe when the legislature is in session. It seems that sometimes legislators sponsor bills because they feel obligated to do something, anything. I seems that you feel like this: what kind of legislator am I if I don’t legislate? Well, if there is no compelling need for a piece of legislation, then don’t propose it. We already have too many laws on the books. So, first I would say your bill is unnecessary. If girls are getting sexually transmitted diseases, it is not for lack of education. It is primarily the fault of living in our sex-saturated culture. We don’t need your bill, and we don’t need to liberalize our state sex education law. In fact, I agree with this lady, and would rather have no sex education in our schools at all.
Here in my hand I have empirical evidence that abstinence-based education has met with outstanding success. I also hold in my hand empirical evidence that so-called comprehensive sex education has been an utter failure, being responsible for increased rates of promiscuity, sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy. So, your resort to empirical evidence is not persuasive, because I can show as much evidence on my side as you can on yours.
I have heard several stories showing why your comprehensive sex education is needed. This is called anecdotal evidence. Again, I can match you story for story on why expanded sex education is not needed. So, your resort to anecdotal evidence is not persuasive. I would hate to think you would have us revise the law for the whole state based on just a few stories of kids who don’t want to talk to their parents.
It has also been stated that this bill is much needed because some parents fail to talk to their children about sex. Your resort to the we-have-to-do-it-because-the-parents-won’t argument is your weakest point. And I think the most dangerous. If you follow that logic of having the government or the school provide for everything that some parents don’t do, there is no end to what the government or school will do. They will find justification for meddling in every aspect of our lives, as the federal government is attempting to do right now with the energy tax and health care legislation, among others. So, your resort to having the school talk explicit sex to children because parents aren’t is not persuasive.
If your arguments are not persuasive, then we obviously don’t need the bill. But if we can’t resort to those unpersuasive arguments, then where do we resort to find justification for this or any proposed law? We resort to the community who is to be affected by the law. In this case it is a state law, so our resort should be to the people of the state. What are the desires, beliefs, and values of the citizens of the state? You say you at PP are the largest provider of sexual counseling in the state. I say you are out of step with the values of the people of the state. Rep. Hemingway, I think you will find that what you are proposing here is also not in keeping with the values of the citizens. I am sure you will find that majority of the people hold to traditional morality, and that they would rather have time-tested, God-based values as the foundation of their laws on which our culture is built.
So, we don’t need your bill, and I hope you won’t file it. If it is filed, I hope it dies in the committee. Thank you.
As I say, that is a paraphrase, but the points made are valid. If you ever get into a discussion and your adversary resorts to using any of the 3 methods just discussed: Empirical evidence, anecdotal evidence, failure of responsible parties to perform perfectly; if you find yourself in that situation, then try using the refutations discussed above. You should be able to neutralize their points, and make good points of your own from your traditional, God-based, time-tested values. Another thought is that when your adversary makes a statement which sounds like justification of their stance, it will invariably turn out to be not true. And you can say just that. “That is not true.” They will then resort to one of a number of fall-back positions. The will say, “Well everyone knows that . . .”, “It is a known fact that . . ,” “It was reported on TV ( on the radio, in the newspaper) that . . .” The answer to all these is, “That is not true.” Then ask them to provide support for their statements. They will not be able to do so. Then you can make your statement of truth and not be on the defensive. You want to stay on topic and not let them distract you with meaningless sidetrack arguments.
Here’s one more point. When you hear of meetings or gatherings, attend and speak up. It is right and good to stand for your beliefs and values. If we sit back and quietly watch while others have their way with our community, country, and culture, one day we will wake up and be horrified at what we find.
Ravi Zacharias Speaks on Finding Truth in a Morally Falling Society June 21, 2009
We came across this speech given by Christian minister Ravi Zacharias and really liked it. In it he says the process of secularization, pluralization, and privatization have contributed to a morally falling society. He counters this reality with the truth of the Scriptures: We are not orphaned in this world, for God has created us with dignity and invites us to worship and serve Him. Listen to part 1, part 2 and part 3.
912 Project Network founder Jared Law
Stephen Graham's guest on K-Talk Radio
Stephen Graham was host on K-Talk radio on Saturday, June 6, 2009. His guest was Jared Law, founder of the 912 Project Network. On the show Law discussed the 9 Principles and 12 Values at the basis of the 912 movement. Also, The 5000-year Leap, by W. Cleon Skousen was discussed. The very interesting radio program can be heard on this SoL website.
Obama declares June 'LGBT Pride Month'
Jody Brown and Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 6/2/2009
In a presidential proclamation on the White House website, Barack Obama has lauded what he calls "the determination and dedication" of the LGBT movement by proclaiming June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
"The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress," Obama states in the official proclamation, "but there is more to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect."
The proclamation, released on Monday, credits the LGBT movement with being a factor in more Americans who ascribe to those groups "living their lives openly today than ever before."
The president also takes pride in being the first U.S. chief executive to appoint "openly LGBT" candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an administration.
He uses the proclamation to emphasize LGBT-related initiatives that he intends to pursue in the future -- both domestically and internationally.
"I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexual around the world," he states. "Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans."
Among those measures he lists "hate crimes" laws, civil unions, discrimination in the workplace, adoption rights, and ending the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy "in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security."
Pro-family activist says Peter LaBarbera it is sad, but not surprising, that President Obama has chosen to issue a proclamation celebrating homosexuality. The president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality says Obama is pandering to homosexual political activists.
"Homosexuality is nothing to be proud of -- bottom line," says LaBarbera. "The fact is people have left the lifestyle, people have overcome homosexuality [with God's help] -- I think that's something to be proud of...."
Click here to read the rest of the OneNewsNow story.
PBS weighs religious content on stations like KBYU
Janice Peterson - Daily herald - 19 May 2009
PROVO -- The national Public Broadcasting Service is reviewing its membership policies on religious content for its PBS affiliates, and an upcoming vote on the issue could affect the standing of stations like KBYU.
Jan McNamara, director of corporate communications for PBS, said the Station Services Committee of the PBS board is currently reviewing core policies for its members, namely the mandate that stations must provide a nonsectarian, nonpolitical and noncommercial educational service.
"This is language that has been in our core membership policies at least since 1985," McNamara said.
Feedback has been sought from member stations on just what defines these three qualities, and a vote will be taken June 16 after the committee makes a recommendation on the membership policies, she said.
The final vote could affect a handful of PBS affiliates including KBYU, which frequently runs devotionals from Brigham Young University and other programs related to the LDS Church, along with shows like "Arthur" and "Curious George." How any station will be affected, officials could not say. McNamara said it is unclear if a station will lose its PBS affiliation because of religious programming. It will all depend on the feedback from member stations and the final vote in June.
However, McNamara said the policy review is more about keeping up with the times, as different ways to give programming to users have emerged. Internet use is more prevalent now, as are multicasts from stations. The review is mainly taking place because one hasn't been done since 1997, she said.
McNamara pointed out that the PBS board is made up of mostly general managers from member stations, so those voting will have some insight on how stations are running. In the end, the six to 10 PBS affiliates that run religious broadcasts may not be at serious risk of losing affiliation, she said.
"As a membership organization, our priority is always to work with our stations," she said.
Brigham Young University spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said she would hesitate to speculate on the fate of KBYU with PBS. However, she said officials have been aware of the issue for some time and are confident the station will continue to offer "educational and uplifting" programming.
Click here to read the rest of the Daily Herald article.
See more articles on this topic in our News Links in the left column.
May 10, 2009. It's not about civil rights. It's about what's right. Parents have to care more about reality than political correctness. True love for a child would be to help them understand where these feelings went wrong, to encourage them to reject this harmful life style, to guide them toward repentance. Homosexual conduct is another way kids test their parents' strength and beliefs. In this licentious culture youth are easily lured into experimentation, and once you're in to homosexuality, there's a huge amount of gay affirmation.Think of it this way: should parents give in to a tobacco, alcohol, or drug addiction? You love them enough to risk their disapproval while helping, hoping and praying the ultimate best for them. Please read our "The Only Good Choice."
We also remind you of books in the works:
Captain of My Soul -- a young man's true story of choosing to overcome homosexuality
Chased by an Elephant -- the gospel truth about today's stampeding sexuality for tweens.
These books contain essential information for preventing or overcoming wrong ideas about sexuality.
Miss California USA Loses Crown after Defending Marriage
by Jennifer Mesko, editor. May 5, 2009
'It's not about being politically correct. For me, it was being biblically correct.'
Miss California USA Carrie Prejean said she knew she'd lost the Miss USA crown as soon as she spoke in favor of one-man, one-woman marriage.
During Sunday night's Miss USA telecast, Prejean was asked whether other states should follow Vermont's lead in legislating same-sex "marriage."
"In my family, I … believe marriage should be between a man and a woman," she said. "No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."
Prejean later told NBC: "I knew at that moment, after I'd answered the question, I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer — because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs, and for my God."
Even Donald Trump, who co-owns the pageant, said her answer "probably did cost her the crown." Prejean finished as first runner-up to Miss North Carolina.
Perez Hilton, a gay-activist blogger, was the judge who posed the question to Prejean. He called it the "worst answer in pageant history" and called Miss California profane names.
"That is not the kind of woman I want to be Miss USA," he told MSNBC. "Miss USA should represent all Americans. And with her answer, she instantly was divisive and alienated millions."
Interestingly, tens of millions of Americans in 30 states — including California — have passed constitutional amendments to protect the definition of marriage.
"The majority of California’s voters — more than 7 million people — voted to protect traditional marriage," Ron Prentice, chairman of California's ProtectMarriage.com, told Fox News. "And we congratulate Miss California for her conviction to speak her beliefs."
Hilton apologized Monday for his comments, but today said he stands by what he said.
Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, also lashed out: “I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman. … Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss California family.”
Prejean said she would give the same answer again.
"Bottom line is, I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman," she told NBC. "It's not about being politically correct. For me, it was being biblically correct.
Standard of Liberty Calls for Justice and Equal Treatment from the Utah Senate: Reinstate Senator Buttars to the Senate Judiciary Committee or remove Scott McCoy from that same committee
The Standard of Liberty sent the following letter February 23, 2009, to all members of the Utah State Senate, including Senate President Michael Waddoups, who stripped Senator Chris Buttars of his chairmanship on 2 committees as a result of his free speech remarks against homosexuality.
An Open Letter to the Utah State Senate from the Standard of Liberty
To Utah State Senators,
Your stated reasons for removing duly elected Senator Buttars from the Senate Judiciary Committee are unacceptable. Based on Constitutionally-guaranteed rights, we call on you to reinstate Senator Buttars to his former position as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Failing that, we at the Standard of Liberty call for at least the same accommodation that has been given to Equality Utah: We call on you to remove the outspoken, openly "gay" Senator, Scott McCoy, from the Senate Judiciary Committee also.
Senator McCoy’s shamelessness about his self-identification as "gay"and his crafty efforts to legitimize and celebrate lawless and unlimited sexuality through government action, such as his insidious Common Ground initiative, make his influence in the Senate dangerous, discriminatory, and hurtful. His mockery of traditional sexual morality and his intolerance of the free exercise of religion are extremely offensive to us at the Standard of Liberty and to most Utahns. We noted with alarm that Senator McCoy was one of the officiators at the highly uncivil anti-Mormon protest near Temple Square Nov. 7, 2008 following the passing of Proposition 8 in California.
Suffice it to say that Senator McCoy's view is as offensive to the Standard of Liberty as Senator Buttars is to Equality Utah. Senator McCoy’s sexual ideology is a vehement denunciation of God’s laws as stated in the Bible, therefore we believe his world view to be anti-God. To be just, if you remove a Senator with strong "anti-gay" views from this committee, you must remove a Senator with strong anti-God views.
We trust you will act with integrity, come what may. Persecution of religious people because of pressure from a noisy, licentious group is intolerable in our free, God-based society. Perhaps it hasn’t been noticed that when special treatment is given to "gays" (who do not constitute a legally protected minority in Utah), everyone else is discriminated against.Sincerely,
Stephen and Janice Graham
Standard of Liberty
Standard of Liberty Calls on Utah State Senate to not sanction Sen. Chris Buttars.
The Standard of Liberty sent the following letter February 19, 2009, to all members of the Utah State Senate, who were deciding what to do to Senator Chris Buttars for his remarks against homosexuality.
We are dismayed that there is any thought at all of punishing Utah State Senator Buttars for speaking the truth based on his traditional and Biblical religious values. He was merely exercising his Constitutional rights of free speech and relgion. And most of your constituents share his views that homosexuality is blight on society. Will we be punished too somehow if we exercise our right to speak freely against this vice? This development is really quite frightening. We believe and have seen how homosexuality and the homosexual activist movement are harmful, especially to youth. Such reckless and self-destructive behavior deserves no legal legitimization. If you punish Senator Buttars, you are playing into the homosexual agenda to silence the opposition, i.e. traditional values and Christianity. The politically correct double standard going on is incredible. Gays are congratulated for calling religious people all sorts of derogatory names, while religious people are punished for telling the truth.
As Newt Gengrich recently said, “I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact. For that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite of what you're taught in Sunday school. I think when the left, when the radicals lost the vote in California [prop 8], they are determined to impose their will on this country no matter what the popular opinion, no matter what the law of the land. You've watched them, for example, in Massachusetts, basically drive the Catholic Church out of running adoption services, drive Catholic hospitals out of offering any services, because [the radicals] impose secular rules that are fundamentally … sinful from the standpoint of the church."
Stephen and Janice Graham
Standard of Liberty
Standard of Liberty received a lot of response to Camille Turpin's review of Stephanie Meyer's book Breaking Dawn, including the following email note:
"Thank you very much for this warning about Breaking Dawn! Would you or the reviewer be so kind as to identify half a dozen passages in the book where these false and treacherous ideas are manifest? My wife and I are thinking of spending some time with our daughters citing such passages and identifying the false ideas in them. (But we don't want to have to read the whole book to find these passages.) In other words, we feel this would be a helpful learning experience for our daughters--who have already read the book--so they will get better at identifying these false notions on their own. Thanks." --A Reader (name withheld)
We got the same request from a number of people, so we asked Camille Turpin to prepare references for her list of wrong ideas in the books. Below is the list she sent us. We are sure you will find it helpful in discussions with your family. Also, Camille Turpin and Standard of Liberty were referenced in the August 24 Salt Lake Tribune. Click here to read the Tribune article.
A list of wrong ideas about love and sex that are presented in the Twilight series. References to books and pages are included.
Dangerous people are sexy (Twilight pg 190/Entire Series)
Love should be enduring no matter how unhealthy or dangerous it is for you (Twilight/Entire Series—Edward agrees to turn Bella into a vampire so they can be young together forever)
Some people think it's not a good idea to have sex before marriage, but it's fun to see how far you can go before you cross the line (Eclipse—Edward wants to wait until they are married to have sex, but Bella wants to do it before then. Edward insists he is trying to protect her virtue—which she laughs at—but they are having this conversation on a bed which he has provided while he kisses her neck and puts her leg over him)
If you use self-control, you can go really far before actually having intercourse (Eclipse/Entire Series—Bella and Edward are constantly trying to push how far they can go physically before he is out of control, which means he may kill her at any moment.)
Even if you think premarital sex is wrong, sleeping together and sneaking around behind a parent's back is ok (Twilight/Entire Series—Edward spends each night in Bella’s room, listening with supernatural hearing to her father in the next room to make sure he won’t come in.)
Parents don't know what's good for you in terms of love. (Bella’s mother is very critical of youthful love/marriage because she is divorced. Bella treats her as though she is a child who needs to be taken care of. Bella’s father does not like Edward, but Bella continues to see him anyway.)
Marriage is something to be feared, and which may ruin your enjoyment of sex. (Eclipse—Bella wants to have sex before they are married because she hates the idea of marriage and wishes they could just have a physical commitment. He wants to wait until after she is a vampire because it could be dangerous for her. She refuses and only agrees to wait until marriage as long as she gets a real honeymoon while she’s human. She constantly complains about marriage—see BD Chapter 1.)
Sexual intercourse is the best part of love, marriage, and human life. (BD page 482—“Our time on the island had been the epitome of my human life. The very best of it. I’d been so ready to string along my human time, just to hold on to what I had with him for a little while longer. Because the physical part wasn’t going to be the same ever again.”)
If sex is good, it will probably be violent. (BD Chapter 5 and 6. Edward bites pillows, shreds clothing, creates bruises all over Bella’s body, and breaks headboards apart. He tries not to do it again, but Bella convinces him to and downplays her injuries.)
If sex is violent, it will not hurt you as long as you are really into it. (Bella does not notice the destroyed pillows or her bruised body until she wakes up the next morning. Pg. 89)
The more violent and out of control the sex is, the better it is. You might destroy things, but that just means it was great. (Bella has dreams about sex after Edward refuses to do it again until she is a vampire. She wakes up and convinces him to do it—page 106-107. He destroys a headboard and they joke about it. Later on they decide to do it again and make a joke about destroying the headboard again—page 117.)
In a perfect world, we would desire and be able to have intercourse all night long, and wish it would go on longer. The best possible scenario would be for our bodies to never wear out and for our desire to be constant. (BD page 482-483)
Sex is more enjoyable if our partner's body is perfect (BD page 482). If you really love your partner, you won't mind if they are in love with someone else too, or that they want them around all the time (Bella loves her “best friend” Jacob, and desires him physically in New Moon and Eclipse. Jacob is desperately in love with Bella. Edward brings Jacob to Bella and lets them have a dance at their wedding, and then allows him to hang around afterward). In fact, if you really love them, you won't mind if they have sexual intercourse with someone else (Edward, thinking their baby is dangerous and should be aborted, asks Jacob to tell Bella they could have a physical relationship so Bella could have less dangerous children—BD page 180, 181).
Sometimes people might desire a child to be their mate. It's innocent as long as they don't act on it till they are older (Werewolves often “imprint” on another person, meaning they have found their mate and cannot control whether they want that person or not. Jacob “imprints” on Bella’s half-human infant).
When you love someone, you desire them physically every moment of your life. You will have to distract yourself with daily life in order to keep your mind off of sex, but it always there, in the background, and can be turned on at any moment, blocking out everything else (Bella is constantly losing concentration and forgetting totally about her child when she looks at Edward and thinks about sex BD page 487).
It is normal and good to picture a person you love naked before you are married (BD page 349).
As long as the actual motions of sexual intercourse are not described in detail, it is ok to write and read about a physical relationship between a married man and woman--including where they are, what they are wearing, how long it went on, the positions they end up in, that certain motions of their bodies will stimulate sexual desire, and how they felt during the process (BD chapters 5 and 6, and especially page 481-485).
If you really desire your partner, you might tear each other's clothes off, destroying them in the process (BD page 481).
You have absolutely no control over who you love and how long you love them. Once you find that person, it is easy to love them and you will do anything for them. If you really love each other, you won't have any real problems (Entire Series—imprinting idea, Jacob and Edward are willing to risk their lives several times over for Bella, and in BD after they are married Bella and Edward never have a single argument or hardship. Their entire life is a happy honeymoon with a perfect child.)
The pain of losing someone you love is so painful that death is better in comparison. If you really love them, you'll never ever get over losing them. (This idea is expressed several times mostly in New Moon and BD. Edward is going to kill himself when he thinks Bella is dead. Bella wishes she were dead after Edward leaves her, Jacob wants to kill Edward if Bella dies and Edward makes sure he promises to do it, etc.)
Sexy people are tall, muscular, perfect. Normal people just seem so childish. (Bella doesn’t take highschool boys seriously, and is only in love with vampires and werewolves who are superhumanly strong, tall, hot or cold, etc.)
Sexual intercourse is the most important part of marriage. (Again see BD 482 and subsequent vampire life.)
Thanks to Camille Turpin for the following review of Breaking Dawn, Stephanie Meyer’s fourth in the extremely popular Twilight Series published by Little, Brown. To read the entire review, click here. On this page we offer excerpts including Turpin’s list of wrong and harmful ideas introduced in the series. Please note that the initial printing of this fourth book was 3.7 million copies and over 1.3 million copies sold on the first day.
Meyer is LDS, in her early thirties, married with children, and is a BYU graduate (1997). The vampire series has a teenage girl as its main character and is wildly popular with all ages of girls and women from age 9 to 50, including Latter-day Saints. Mothers and daughters read the books repeatedly. The series has a huge fan base which includes parties/book signings, retail merchandise, and hundreds of internet groups, one with 50,000 and another with 20,000 members.
Turpin, is LDS, 30, married with children, graduated from BYU in English (editing), and interned at BYU’s scholarly publishing arms, FARMS and BYU Studies. She has edited 4 published books, and reads over 50 books a year of various genres.
Book Review: What’s Broken about Breaking Dawn
by Camille Turpin
I was a big Twilight fan. It was fun. It was fluffy. It was a nice change from all the heavy stuff I usually read. And the author was LDS. But as the series progressed I became more and more disenchanted. Then came the last book in the series, Breaking Dawn in which the main characters, a human and a vampire, get married.
I could write all day about the things I didn’t like about this novel– it was poorly written to say the least – but those are the flaws that make me merely roll my eyes. What makes me angry is the sneaky sex stuff, disguised as a contemporary teen romance/fantasy/ vampire story. That’s why I’m now a Twi-hater. All I could think while I was reading the last two in the series were two questions I often ask myself when presented with something I want to read/watch but I’m not sure I should: What good can come of it? And what bad can come of it? At the very best, the good that can come of the Twilight series is the idea that young people can wait until marriage to experience physical sexual intimacy. At the worst, it introduces girls and women of every age to edge-of-the-cliff sexual “morality” and unhealthy, extreme, and twisted ideas about sex, marriage, and motherhood. To illustrate, I made the following list of wrong and harmful ideas presented in the Twilight series.
* Dangerous people are sexy.
* Love should be enduring no matter how unhealthy or dangerous it is for you.
* Some people think it's not a good idea to have sex before marriage, but it's fun to see how far you can go before you cross the line.
* If you use self-control, you can go really far before actually having intercourse.
* Even if you think premarital sex is wrong, sleeping together and sneaking around behind a parent's back is okay.
* Parents don't know what's good for you in terms of love.
* Marriage is something to be feared and may ruin your enjoyment of sex.
* Sexual intercourse is the best part of love, marriage, and human life.
* If sex is good it will probably be violent.
* If sex is violent it will not permanently hurt you as long as you are really into it.
* The more violent and out of control the sex is, the better it is. If you really desire your partner, you might tear each other's clothes off, destroying them in the process. You might destroy furniture, too, and hurt each other, but that just means it was great. (In Breaking Dawn Edward tears clothes, rips apart pillows with his teeth and destroys furniture during sex. Bella wakes up with bruises all over her body.)
* In a perfect world, we would desire and be able to have intercourse all night long, and wish it would go on longer. The best possible scenario would be for our bodies to never wear out and for our desire to be constant.
* Sex is more enjoyable if our partner's body is perfect. (Edward has a perfect body.)
* If you really love your partner, you won't mind if they are in love with someone else too, or that they want them around all the time. In fact, if you really love them, you won't mind if they have sexual intercourse with someone else. (Edward, the vampire husband, suggests that Bella, his wife, have relations with Jacob, the werewolf.)
* Sometimes people might desire an infant to be their mate. It's innocent as long as they don't act on it until they are older. (The werewolf “imprints” himself on Bella’s baby, meaning the baby is his eternal mate.)
* When you love someone, you desire them physically every moment of your life. You will have to distract yourself with daily life in order to keep your mind off of sex, but it’s always there, in the background, and can be turned on at any moment, blocking out everything else.
* It is normal and good to picture a person you love naked before you are married.
* As long as the actual motions of sexual intercourse are not described in detail, it is okay to write and read about a physical relationship between a married man and woman--including where they are, what they are wearing, how long it went on, the positions they end up in, that certain motions of their bodies which stimulate sexual desire, and how they felt during the process.
* You have absolutely no control over who you love and how long you love them. Once you find that person, it is easy to love them and you will do anything for them. If you really love each other, you won't have any real problems.
* The pain of losing someone you love is so painful that death is better in comparison. If you really love them, you'll never ever get over losing them.
* Sexy people are tall, muscular, perfect. Normal people just seem so childish.
* Sexual intercourse is the most important part of marriage.
Here are some additional disturbing events and images in Breaking Dawn.
* The heroine/mother drinks blood while pregnant and her baby drinks blood from a bottle.
* Pregnancy is portrayed as horrific, involving the fetus breaking the mother’s ribs and pelvis, giving her huge bruises on her abdomen, and the baby sucking the life out of her from within.
* In the childbirth scene the mother vomits blood and is ripped open by her vampire husband’s teeth, the baby bites the mother immediately after birth, the mother dies in the process of the birth, and the vampire bites and licks her body back to life.
* Vampires gather from all over the world to save the vampire/human baby, and the heroine/mother and hero/father do not mind that the other vampires are drinking human blood and murdering the local population. In this book vampires are not ghouls and devils but superior beings.
I heard somewhere that Stephanie Meyer had concerns that this last book in her series had content that was too mature for some of her fans and tried to have a warning put on the book, but the publisher wouldn’t allow it. Please. As if a warning would have kept 11-year-olds from reading Breaking Dawn after they had been so cleverly hooked with three previous books. When you begin a series for young people, you have a moral obligation to keep it geared toward young people. We can only surmise that somewhere along the line Stephanie Meyer, our own wildly successful LDS author, sold out. Everybody knows sex sells.
To read the entire review click here.
Like Flannery O'Connor said, "I am not afraid that this book will be controversial. I am afraid that it will not be controversial." She also wrote, "The two worst sins of bad taste in fiction are pornography and sentimentality. One is too much sex and the other too much sentiment. You have to have enough of either to prove your point but no more . . . it's when sex and scurrility are used for their own sakes that it is in bad taste.”
G. K. Chesterson wrote, "Good literature tells us the mind of one man; but bad literature may tell us the mind of many men. A good novel tells us the truth about its hero; but a bad novel tells us the truth about its author. It does much more than that, it tells us the truth about its readers and oddly enough, it tells us this all the more the more cynical and immoral be the motive of its manufacture. The more dishonest a book is as a book the more honest it is as a public document."
Given our oversexed culture, we are all in danger of being conditioned into thinking that preoccupation with sex and selfish, unhealthy, extreme, and bizarre ideas about sex are all okay, even praiseworthy. After all, we learn from Oprah and Dr. Laura that pornography can spice up a marriage. This book is a perfect example of being very cleverly taken in bit by bit. These ideas are not harmless. Anything other than kind, loving, wholesome, healthy relations between husband and wife, where husband and wife are focused on their love for each other rather than on sex for its own sake, is unchaste, to put it mildly.
Please look for our new book coming soon, Chased by an Elephant, the gospel truth about today’s stampeding sexuality, for LDS families. Sad to say, Meyer's book series is a made-to-order representation of that stampede.
APA's New Pamphlet on Homosexuality
De-emphasizes the Biological Argument, Supports
a Client's Right to Self-Determination
The APA has now begun to acknowledge what most scientists have long known:
that a bio-psycho-social model of causation best fits the data.
A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH
March 6, 2008 - In 1998, the American Psychological Association (APA) published a brochure titled "Answers to Your Questions about Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality."This particular document was ostensibly published to provide definitive answers about homosexuality. However, few of the assertions made in the brochure could find any basis in psychological science. Clearly a document anchored more in activism than in empiricism, the brochure was simply a demonstration of how far APA had strayed from science, and how much it had capitulated to activism.The newest APA brochure, which appears to be an update of the older one, is titled, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality."Though both brochures have strong activist overtones (both were created with "editorial assistance from the APA Committee on Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns"), the newer document is more reflective of science and more consistent with the ethicality of psychological care.Consider the following statement from the first document:
"There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality."
That statement was omitted from the current document and replaced with the following:
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."
Although there is no mention of the research that influenced this new position statement, it is clear that efforts to "prove" that homosexuality is simply a biological fait accompli have failed. The activist researchers themselves have reluctantly reached that conclusion. There is no gay gene. There is no simple biological pathway to homosexuality. Byne and Parsons, and Friedman and Downey, were correct: a bio-psycho-social model best fits the data.
Guest Editorial--by W. Scott Barrett December 29, 2007
Some years ago on the Mary Tyler Moore show they had a segment where Lou Grant's wife decided to leave him and their marriage of some years. It was a sign of the times. She says: "I am sorry Lou, but I was very young when I married you and did not know much. I want to go out on my own now and find out Who I really am..." What nonsense. By leaving for such a fatuous reason she was proving who she really was - a fair weather, uncommitted spouse who instead of being loyal, faithful, and enduring, has decided to pursue another wholly selfish path.
We often hear people say "I want to find out who I really am.." as if there was some magic formula that established identity for each of us. The fact is that each of us is born the son or daughter of our parents. We have unlimited possibilities. Some of what we are will be determined by our upbringing and our innate personality, but we are not born with an identity that cannot be changed by our thinking and our conduct. Many have had poor parenting and bad upbringing only to overcome it by their thinking and conduct. The contrary is also true. This is based on personal choice and conduct. We can change. That is the central message of Christ - whatever you are now you can change for the better. We are after all, what our thinking and conduct makes us. "As a man thinketh, so is he." "The thought is the father of the act." We can change our thinking and control it such that our conduct will improve for the better.
Too often, giving in to an identity that we have created for ourselves by our thinking and our conduct is an easy excuse for the criminal, the unfaithful, the immoral and the uncommitted. We all tend to justify ourselves and what we do in our own minds. Thus, bad conduct can be justified by simply saying to ones self -"Well that is just the way I am. Maybe I was born that way. I cannot change it because other forces have determined the way I conduct myself." This is the devil speaking. There will be no repentance or change of conduct so long as we give in to the false premise that we have an identity that cannot be changed.
So let us not forget WHO we are. The product of good teaching, good example, and good thinking on our part. That identity is a product of how we live and have lived; how we think and have thought; how we act and have acted. You are in control and do not let anyone tell you otherwise.
-W. Scott Barrett
This is a review of a new book by Carol Lynn Pearson, No More Goodbyes: Circling the Wagons Around our Gay Loved Ones
Review of No More Goodbyes
by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH
The advertisement in part reads, "Looking for Stories From or About Gay Members of Religious Families...the tragic and unnecessary goodbyes that arise from family alienation, ill-fated marriages based on unrealistic expectations of change and suicide."
No writer, even of book reviews, can completely disengage from his or her worldview. Most writers don't (though perhaps they should) offer a window into their worldviews so readers can factor those perspectives into what they read.
So here is my attempt, if you will, to offer that window into my worldview. I was raised in a large Buddhist, Southern Baptist family. Both of my parents exerted influences, somewhat complementary, on me.From my mother, I learned the value of sadness in the true Buddhist tradition, sadness which one seeks as a positive emotion, an emotion that will help deal with the losses in life.From my father, I learned that there were certain truths that were discovered, not constructed--they were truths that emerged from the Divine--it didn't matter whether or not you agreed with the truths: they just were.One of the truths that I learned from my father was the importance of grace in our lives. He always said that grace would take us the last mile of the way. The discovery of grace in my own life has validated this truth. This truth was the most important discovery in my life's journey, and perhaps made me vulnerable to the gospel when it came to my door.When I was introduced to the gospel of Jesus Christ, I embraced it without exception or reservation. I believed the Joseph Smith Story because I, too, had discovered the truth. The truths of the gospel found, and continue to find, their way into my daily life whether it is lecturing at the medical school, preparing a scientific article for publication, or teaching a Sunday School class. I suspect these truths will also find their way into this review. And I offer no apologies.Another disclosure that I need to make is that I know Carol Lynn Pearson--at a distance, primarily through Gerald (her husband), members of her family and through what she has written.I first became acquainted with Pearson in the fall of 1969. My future wife, who was Chair of Cultural Events in her dorm at BYU, had invited Pearson to speak. I had read Pearson's first book, and dearly loved her poem, The Lesson, "Yes, my fretting, frowning child..." The poem resonated with me, was the source of much inspiration, and continues to be so even to this day. This book which included this poem and others was titled Beginnings, and was published 1967. I was quite excited to meet the author of this favorite poem.Pearson was very gracious, but I really don't remember what she talked about. I talked to her briefly and she signed a copy of her book for my wife to be. But I was left with one impression: Carol Lynn Pearson had a sadness which my mother had taught me to recognize in myself and others.I was better acquainted with Gerald. I met him in the late sixties during a time when many struggled with drug problems. Gerald worked with a group (in fact the group was called The Group) of such young men in the basement of the Provo Tabernacle. I was a young psychology student at the time.I had a few talks with Gerald. His heart seemed unusually good, but there was something about him that tended to "hide in broad daylight." Outwardly, he appeared confident but in personal conversations, he seemed preoccupied and insecure. He seemed very interested in those men who struggled with homosexuality.Finally, I am a psychologist--university educated and board licensed. I am well into my fourth decade of practice, research and teaching. Initially, as a newly minted psychologist, I worked with men who struggled with homosexuality because no one else would. Later in my career, I worked with these men because I wanted to.
As I read Pearson's book, I felt that I was actually reading two books. The "first book" (referring to the first reading of the book) focused on the very difficult times that men and women who struggle with the issues of homosexuality face. Some indeed have been rejected by family and friends and find solace in the gay community. And some do suffer from a variety of psychological problems such as anxiety and depression. Some even take their own lives.But fortunately things are getting better. We are a tolerant society. The Mormon community especially has become very tolerant, in fact so tolerant that in an Ensign article, Elder Oaks expressed concerned about unlimited tolerance. He noted that "Love and tolerance are incomplete unless they are accompanied by a concern for truth and a commitment to the unity God has commanded of his servants." He further noted that "Carried to an undisciplined excess, love and tolerance can produce indifference to truth and justice, and opposition to unity."As well, Elder Packer concluded, "The word tolerance is also invoked as though it overrules everything else. Tolerance may be a virtue, but it is not the commanding one. There is a difference between what one is and what one does. What one is may deserve unlimited tolerance, what one does, only a measured amount. A virtue when pressed to the extreme may turn into a vice."As we look around us, we can surely witness evidence for the turning of tolerance from virtue to vice, particularly in areas involving sexuality such as cohabitation, promiscuity, pornography and homosexuality. In fact, the slippery slope of unlimited tolerance expressed by Alexander Pope seems truer each day. Indeed, "we first endure, then pity, then embrace."Certainly, the advice and counsel from two of the Lord's Anointed is worth considering when dealing with issues such as those associated with homosexuality, particularly when accompanied by the abundance of scientific evidence associated with the consequences of homosexual activities.In my first reading of her book, I noted that Pearson counsels family members to maintain contact with and to love their children. She urges family members to get to know their children and to value them. Story after story was heart wrenching (some, even tragic) in their messages--each, in some fashion or another, stressed the importance of Christ-like love.I take no issues with these sentiments. In fact, I can think of no one who would.However, noticeably lacking was a discussion or even mention of men and women who had traveled other routes, who had managed to make different choices about their homosexual challenges and are happy. These are the men and women who have been able to eliminate or diminish homosexual attractions and have made lasting changes in their lives. These men and women were given no place in Pearson's book, as if they did not exist or their stories had no merit. Such individuals are many. I know hundreds of them; they DO exist. They serve as Church leaders at almost every level. Many attribute their success to the gospel and its resources. I know these men because I assisted them on their journey out of homosexuality. Some of them were even Gerald's friends. They are the quiet heroes whose stories are often written under pseudonyms because they do not want attention brought to themselves or their families. But these men and women are very much present in every walk of life.So this is my review of the first book: Well written, a plea for compassion for those who suffer, but woefully biased against those who have successfully made their way out of homosexuality, to the point of Pearson actually excluding them. Had Pearson been more balanced and had she included narratives of those who had successfully navigated out of homosexuality, the book would have been a more important and valued resource. For Pearson to achieve this balance now, she would have to write another book and would need to advertise differently for stories, perhaps even in a venue other than Sunstone. The advertisement might read: "Left Homosexuality? Looking for Stories of Those Who Have, and How Their Faith Tradition Was Helpful."I should note that some of Pearson's facts are incorrect. For example, contrary to her claim, Allen Gundry (whose name she misspelled) never served as Head of the Department of Homosexual Concerns in LDS Social Services (now called LDS Family Services). There has never been such a department. Allen never conducted any research. I supervised Allen for a number of years. The only data Allen ever collected was under my supervision and offered evidence that a significant number of men he treated had been sexually abused as children.In addition, David Hardy, whose letter to Elder Packer was excerpted in the book, never served on the Board of Evergreen International. I served on Evergreen's Board, and recently asked David Pruden, the current Executive Director, about David Hardy's alleged service on his board. Mr. Pruden's response was: "At no time has David Hardy ever served on the Board of Trustees of Evergreen International. He has never attended any Board meeting nor was he ever invited to do so...Several years ago Mr. Hardy made the statement in an article in the Salt Lake Tribune that he once served on the Board of Evergreen International. I contacted Mr. Hardy and challenged his statement. I reminded him that as an attorney he clearly understood fiduciary responsibility of Board members and reminded him that alluding to the idea that he had ever assumed such responsibility was unethical if not illegal. He apologized for the misunderstanding and the matter was dropped by Evergreen International. If this mischaracterization continues it concerns me very much."Such errors, even if they result from Pearson's carelessness, detract from the credibility of her book. As any good writer knows, such misinformation calls into question the legitimacy of the book's entirety and questions the motives of the author.A second reading of Pearson's book was like reading an entirely different manuscript and was quite disturbing.
- Deception from Start to Finish
By K. B. Napier. Posted on SoL 5/3/2007
In the original Pinocchio story, two very suspicious characters duped him into going with them to a town offering all kinds of earthly delights. He swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker!
After a while of sampling those delights, Pinocchio slowly saw the reality behind what was going on. The glittering prizes proved to be shoddy and perverse. Kicking himself for his stupidity, he got rid of the myth and all was eventually well.
Today, naïve Pinocchio clones are everywhere. But, it seems, they can’t separate reality from myth. The worst social disruption and myth-making today is in the hands of gay activists. Their influence is vast and seemingly unstoppable… but who has bothered to check-out their claims?
Without doubt, gay activists are now master scenery manufacturers. They are making a whole town out of wood and string, in their attempt to get everyone on their side. Those they dupe are usually highly intelligent and in positions of influence. But, for all that, they are nothing but Pinocchios, duped by what they see and hear. They have been told things by gays – but have not looked behind the scenery. If they did, they would be shocked to find an empty space!
New 2007 LDS Church Manual Condemns
Pornography and Homosexuality
Here are some excerpts from the new Priesthood/Relief Society manual for 2007:
Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Spencer W. Kimball
Chapter 17: The Law of Chastity, 178
"The early apostles and prophets mention numerous sins that were reprehensible to them. Many of them were sexual sins—adultery, being without natural affection, lustfulness, infidelity, incontinence, filthy communications, impurity, inordinate affection, fornication. They included all sexual relations outside marriage—petting, sex perversion, masturbation, and preoccupation with sex in one’s thoughts and talking. Included are every hidden and secret sin and all unholy and impure thoughts and practices."
"If one has [homosexual] desires and tendencies, he overcomes them the same as if he had the urge toward petting or fornication or adultery. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor equal to his condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. … Again, contrary to the belief and statement of many people, this [practice], like fornication, is overcomable and forgivable, but again, only upon a deep and abiding repentance, which means total abandonment and complete transformation of thought and act. The fact that some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not change the nature nor the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons and daughters of God; and Christ’s church denounces it and condemns it. … This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it."
"Beware of the devil’s trick of making evil seem good by giving it a label that conceals its character. Just such a device is the rationalization that lust is love."
"But there are false teachers everywhere, using speech and pornographic literature, magazines, radio, TV, street talk—spreading damnable heresies which break down moral standards, and this to gratify the lust of the flesh."
"When we see the depravity of numerous people of our own society in their determination to force upon people vulgar presentations, filthy communications, unnatural practices, we wonder, has Satan reached forth with his wicked, evil hand to pull into his forces the people of this earth? Do we not have enough good people left to stamp out the evil which threatens our world? Why do we continue to compromise with evil and why do we continue to tolerate sin?"
"We hope that our parents and leaders will not tolerate pornography. It is really garbage, but today is peddled as normal and satisfactory food. … There is a link between pornography and the low, sexual drives and perversions."
"It is ridiculous to imply that pornography has no effect."
"Do not be lulled into inaction by the pornographic profiteers who say that to remove obscenity is to deny people the rights of free choice. Do not let them masquerade licentiousness as liberty."
"Precious souls are at stake—souls that are near and dear to each of us. Parents and leaders should safeguard children and youth against immoral influences."
"Unchastity is the great demon of the day. Like an octopus, it fastens its tentacles upon one. There are many paths that lead youth to these defilements."