Connect with us

Professional Homosexual Hater Attacks Beck, Says “Gays Will Come To Get Us”

Published

on

Peter. LaBarbera.

I probably could make this a two-word post, just leaving it at that, and you’d have enough information. But for those of you who have yet to have the “pleasure” of Mr. LaBarbera’s “thoughts,” let me introduce him to you.

From his website: “Peter LaBarbera, 47, is president of Americans For Truth (about Homosexuality, or AFTAH), a group dedicated to exposing the homosexual activist agenda. Founded as a part-time venture in 1996 but reorganized in August 2006, AFTAH seeks to apply the same single-minded determination to opposing the radical homosexual agenda and standing for God-ordained sexuality and the natural family as countless homosexual groups do in promoting their harmful agenda.”

OK…

If that weren’t enough, try this, from Truth Wins Out founder Wayne Besen, who a few days ago in The Huffington Post, wrote, “A few years ago, I dubbed LaBarbera “Porno Pete” because of his bizarre fascination with naughty gay magazines and his penchant to go “undercover” at leather events and photograph naked men. It seems the sodomy-obsessed LaBarbera’s strategy is for anti-gay activists to talk explicitly about gay sex and why it is an unbecoming, immoral “behavior” that undermines society.”

OK.

Now, let me share with you a few of the more “choice” words LaBarbera had to say to Glenn Beck and, well, everyone, today, in his op-ed, “Why Glenn Beck Is Wrong about Legalizing Homosexual ‘Marriage’.”

And then let me counter his asinine thoughts with a dose of reality and truth.

Peter LaBarbera (just typing his name makes my skin crawl) is angry with Glenn Beck, who recently told his fellow Fox co-worker, Bill O’Reilly, that marriage equality (“gay marriage,”) is not a serious threat to America.

Remember? Watch:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=4FMe3LpUhpY%3Ffs%3D1%26hl%3Den_US%26border%3D1

By the way, listen to Bill O’Reilly make that oh-so-close slippery-slope statement that almost blames same-sex marriage for what Beck describes as, “the country burning down.” Oh, and, I’m sorry, Canada. Glenn Beck now has a big problem with you.

OK. So, now back to Peter LaBarbera.

Actually, this first: Why does LaBarbera feel the need to use the word, “homosexual” forty-four times in his piece?

Here’s a sampling:

homosexual “marriage”

federalized homosexual “marriage”

homosexual activism

homosexual Judge

homosexual ‘unions’

Pro-Homosexual Propaganda Centers

homosexual teachers

homosexual relationships

homosexual-”marriage” states

homosexual practice

homosexual-led households

homosexual Scoutmasters

pro-homosexual activism

homosexualist “rights”

pro-homosexualist ideology

homosexual activist attorneys

homosexual legal “rights”

Get the idea that Labarbera has a lot of homosexuality on his mind?…

Now, to the actual “article.”

LaBarbera says, “federalized homosexual “marriage” would override the documented will of the people in the 31 states that have already voted…”

So?

Marriage is a civil right. The Supreme Court has said so. Now, Judge Walker has said so. Civil rights are federal, not state. (The FBI, for instance, investigates civil rights violations.) That one state or thirty-one states have voted against it means nothing. It was not something that should have been up for a vote in the first place.

Oh, and by the way, I’ll remind you that when interracial marriage was deemed “legal,” only 20% of America supported it. The “states rights” thing didn’t work then, it didn’t work when we had slavery, it doesn’t work now.

Perhaps we should have a vote on other rights? Should we vote on, say, if conservative bigots should have the right to spread their hate across America? Should we vote on allowing Peter LaBarbera to continue to spread his falsehoods without consequence?

LaBarbera’s next “point”:

“Legalized homosexual “marriage” will force businessmen and -women to subsidize homosexual relationships even if they rightly believe that those relationships are immoral and deviant.”

Really? I’m pretty sure that as a tax-paying citizen, along with thirty million or so other members of the LGBTQ community, we’ve been subsidizing heterosexual marriage for centuries. We pay taxes that support the 1138 federal benefits that opposite-sex couples enjoy that we cannot. We also pay taxes for things like schools — gladly, I might add — that up until recently we rarely had children to send to.

The gay community had been “subsidizing” the straight community for centuries. It’s time for some payback — in the form of simple equality.

LaBarbera continues, “A businessman who provides marital benefits to his employees could not choose which “marriages” (normal or counterfeit-”gay”) merit company support and which do not — even if he strongly disagrees with homosexual ‘unions’ as a violation of the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, to quote our Declaration of Independence. ”

That’s right, Peter. Just as a businessman who provides marital benefits to his employees cannot choose which marriages, say, interracial, black, white, Asian… to support. It’s a little thing called “equality,” and it’s the very foundation of America. To quote our Declaration of Independence.

LaBarbera writes, “Legalized homosexual “marriage”… turns America’s schools into Pro-Homosexual Propaganda Centers – an evil on a par with legalizing the killing of innocent, unborn children in the womb in the name of “choice” and “reproductive rights.”

Wow. I’m not even going to touch that.

Yes, I am.

So, Peter, same-sex marriage is equal to abortion, and, to your mind, murder?

Wow.

What do you think? Is same-sex marriage akin to murder? How very “Christian” (not!) of you. Isn’t saying same-sex marriage is akin to murder disgusting?

Now, and I’ve said this before, the thing I love about these far-right-wing radical bigots is that they actually think their positions and opinions are so valid, so correct, so true, that other people must believe them also.

Maggie Gallagher is the queen of saying such bigoted things and never realizing what it sounds like.

Here are a few of Peter’s crazy “issues”:

“Picture a lesbian teacher putting the photo of her and her female parter — or maybe the celebratory photo of them kissing after their “marriage” ceremony — on her desk in front of the class.”

Um, I’ve never had a teacher put a photo of their wedding on their desk, but so what?

“In homosexual-”marriage” states, school textbooks will be re-written to validate homosexual “marriages” as the real deal — and the winning “gay marriage” would be portrayed as a genuine civil rights achievement.”

Um, yes, and your point would be?…

“[E]ven very young students would be taught that those who fought the “gay” civil rights movement — culminating in its greatest prize, “marriage equality” — are the modern-day equivalents of Americans who fought against racial reconciliation and true civil rights.”

Um, yes, and your point would be?…

“The law is a teacher and unfortunately the lesson here is that Americans of faith who agree with God against homosexual “marriage” are small-minded, intolerant bigots who “hate gay people.”

Um, yes, and your point would be?…

I’ll leave you with this last “point” from LaBarbera:

“Finally: yes, Glenn, the “gays” — read: driven and well-funded homosexual activists — will “come to get us,” in one important sense (see Beck’s comment to FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly). If history is a guide, homosexual activists will absolutely set their sights on demonizing churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples (a saccharine term I avoid; these are not normal “couples” but people practicing perversion together). Here Mr. Beck, reportedly a Mormon, displays astonishing naivete, particularly for someone in the conservative information business.”

This is a lie, and you, Peter, I believe are a liar.

“Homosexual activists,” as you call us, want nothing to do with religious institutions. We’re not going to try to force them to do or not do anything. And we cannot. That little thing called “separation of church and state,” which you, Peter, and your conservative nincompoops hate so much, actually would protect churches and other houses of worship from “homosexual activists” — or anyone else — who tried to “force” marriage equality on anyone.

So, Peter, how does it feel to be the last vestige of a dying hate, of bigotry and intensely un-American activities?

I guess you know what those who opposed interracial marriage, or the end of slavery, or women’s suffrage, must have felt like as they saw their lives crumble on the wrong side of history.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Targeted by Trump Senator Scorches President’s Pet Project

Published

on

A GOP senator Trump successfully ousted is now costing him a vote for his ballroom.

U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who just days ago lost his primary race to a Trump-endorsed Republican, says he’s a no on the $1 billion the administration is asking for security upgrades to the $400 million ballroom.

Cassidy had voted to convict Trump in his 2021 impeachment trial, and the president responded by endorsing his opponent.

“I just know where I am on the ballroom,” Cassidy said Tuesday afternoon, according to Semafor congressional bureau chief Burgess Everett.

The two-term Republican challenged the administration’s building process.

“They’ve not put out a bid, they’ve not done architectural, they’ve not done engineering, they’ve not done environmental, they haven’t done any of that, they’ve not done historic, which I’m sure they’re meant to do,” he said. “And so they don’t know how much money they should ask for, but they picked a number.”

“That’s not the way to run the government,” Cassidy added. “So they just want a pot of money, and I think they need to give us more detail.”

The Senate is expected to vote on Wednesday on reconciliation legislation that originally was slated to include the $1 billion funding for the Secret Service, which includes the security enhancements.

Cassidy is “noncommittal” on the reconciliation bill itself as well, Everett noted.

Senate Republicans, Politico’s Jordain Carney reports, are “currently short of the votes to include East Wing/ballroom security funding in their reconciliation bill.”

Senate Republican Majority Leader John Thune, when asked about funding the $1 billion, appeared to focus his attention on the main aspects of the legislation.

“The principal objective in this reconciliation bill is to ensure that ICE and CBP are funded,” he said.

The president took time on Tuesday to share specific details about the ballroom and the security construction with reporters.

“All of these columns, they go directly right to the roof of the building,” Trump said of the ballroom in remarks to the press pool. “And again, we call it a drone port. It’s set up for unlimited numbers of drones.”

“When this is finished,” he said, “my term ends shortly after that. This is really for other presidents, this is not for me. This is my gift to the United States of America. I’m going to be able to use it very little.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Finally Found a CNN Analyst He Likes

Published

on

President Donald Trump praised a CNN analyst who has repeatedly highlighted his sinking poll numbers — a striking turn given his long battle with the network.

On the same day that CNN data analyst Harry Enten asked of the president’s poll numbers, “How low can you go?” Trump called him an “honorable guy” who gives “the good and the bad,” as The Daily Beast reported.

“Mr. President,” a reporter asked on Tuesday, “why is the establishment media claiming so desperately that MAGA is divided?”

“Well, I think it’s the strongest it’s ever been,” Trump replied. “I think MAGA’s never been more together, actually.”

Noting that Enten has called Trump’s poll numbers “downright atrocious” and some of “the ugliest numbers” he has ever seen, The Daily Beast reported that Trump “proceeded to launch into a rave review of Enten.”

“I mean, I appreciate the question because even CNN, they did a poll two, three weeks ago,” Trump continued. “They said Trump is at 100 percent.”

“That’s Harry Enten,” Trump said. “I like Harry Enten. You know, he’s got a lot of energy. I like him. But he did a poll and he’s a good pro. And he gives the good and the bad, but I think he’s an honorable guy. He did a lot of good.”

Back in March, Enten had declared Trump had unanimous approval among his MAGA base — even if he was falling among some conservatives.

“You don’t have to be a mathematical genius to know you can’t go higher than 100 percent,” Enten said. “The bottom line is this: if you are a member of MAGA, you approve of Donald Trump.”

Clearly that had stuck with the president.

“MAGA is most of the Republican Party,” Trump said on Tuesday. “The RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) are gone to a large extent.”

Last week, Enten also had bad news for the president.

“The bottom has completely fallen out when it comes to Donald Trump and Latino voters,” he said on Friday. Latino voters from 2024 “have abandoned him with the utmost, just, dislike of what he is doing so far — just 28 percent, a drop of 18 points.”

“Again, the bottom has just completely fallen out, and, of course, when you look across that political map, there are so many races that will be involving a lot of Latino voters, and when you see numbers like this, I just go, ‘Uh oh,’ if I am a Republican running for Congress,” he said.

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘Supremely Disappointed’: Republicans Furious Over Latest Trump Endorsement

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s 11th-hour endorsement in the Texas GOP primary went to far-right Attorney General Ken Paxton over establishment Republican U.S. Senator John Cornyn, dealing an severe blow to the lawmaker’s chances, angering some prominent GOP lawmakers, and likely boosting the chances of underdog Democrat James Talarico winning the seat in the red Lone Star State.

“Ton of concern among GOP [senators] about Trump’s endorsement of Paxton,” CNN’s Manu Raju reported. “Fear it will cost them a lot more money to save a seat in a red state.”

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) said that Trump’s Paxton endorsement “puts that seat in jeopardy” and asked, “how does that help strengthen the president’s hand when we lose a state like Texas?”

“Supremely disappointed,” is how she characterized her reaction.

U.S. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) declared Paxton is “an ethically challenged individual,” reports Semafor congressional bureau chief Burgess Everett.

“John Cornyn is an outstanding senator and deserved, in my judgment, the president’s support,” she said. “Obviously, it’s the president’s call, but I’m disappointed that he did it.”

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a top Trump ally, said, “I think Paxton can win. I think it’d be three times more expensive.”

U.S. Senator Ron Johnson said he was “speechless” and added, “really have no comment.”

Described as “not happy looking,” Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who has supported Senator Cornyn, acknowledged it was President Trump’s decision to make.

Punchbowl News’ Andrew Desiderio reported that Thune was “stone-faced” after the endorsement, and appeared “pretty deep” in anger.

“Most GOP senators really want him to endorse Cornyn,” Everett had reported about 90 minutes before the Trump-Paxton endorsement dropped.

U.S. Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) had said, “I would like to see him support John Cornyn in Texas. I’ve made that clear.”

U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) had said, “I am hopeful that he backs Sen. Cornyn. John has been a steadfast ally of the president and I hope the president sees that.”

Congressional reporter Jamie Dupree described U.S. Senator Roger Wicker’s (R-MS) response as “stone cold silent.”

Professor Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, called Trump’s endorsement of Paxton “Great News for Talarico,” “Bad News for GOP money reserves,” and declared, “If ever there’s a year when a D can win statewide in TX, it’s 2026.”

Talarico responded to the Trump endorsement: “As I said on primary night, it doesn’t matter who wins this runoff. We already know who we’re running against: the billionaire mega-donors and their corrupt political system.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.