Apr 25, 2009

Miss California maligned

What is Hate Speech? I think we have an example of it from Gay Gossip blogger Perez Hilton during the Miss USA pageant, where he asked Miss California Carrie Prejean (on left in photo) about same-sex marriage. She replied "I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised."

But this answer is not acceptable to the Powers of Political Correctness.

Hilton said the reason Miss California lost the Miss USA pageant is not because she was against gay marriage, but because she was "a dumb bitch". Apparently the forces of tolerance will not tolerate anything less than pure and 100% doctrinal conformity.

Normally a mealy-mouthed gossiper would be called out by Polite Society on his tantrum speak, but the main stream media, specifically Larry King in this case, allows this hateful name calling a pass because it is politically correct, though those who have eyes can see the true colors of this rainbow.

Apr 23, 2009

Jesus will come

Only God the Father knows the Day or Time of the end of the Present World, but as Fr. Charles Arminjon explains in his book The End of the Present World, and the Mysteries of the Future Life there will be clear signs of the approach of the End.
1. The Word of God must be proclaimed throughout the whole world. Mt 24:14
2. The man of sin, the son of Perdition, the Anti-Christ will appear (2Thes2:2-4)
3. The conversion of the Jews (Rom 11:14-17)

As to point 1, Catholics do not believe in a Rapture per se, nor in a Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) interpretation of Eternal Assurance, but in perseverance, as the preceding verse in Matthew 24 indicates, "13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations: and then shall the consummation come." And as St. John Chrysostom says in homily on Mt.24:16-18 "And let not any man suppose this to have been spoken hyperbolically; but let him study the writings of Josephus, and learn the truth of the sayings."

Of course Josephus is a primary extra-Scriptural Historical reference to Jesus Christ,"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

Apr 22, 2009

1st Word of God proclaimed

First, the Word of God must be proclaimed throughout the whole world. (Mt 24:14)

At the time of Fr. Arminjon's writing of The End of the Present World, 1881, he wrote, "It remains to be ascertained whether, at the present time, the gospel has been preached all over the earth, and given for a testimony to the totality of nations.
On this Point the Fathers and Doctors are divided. Some say that the words of Christ are to be interpreted morally, and should be understood in the sense of a partial, summary preaching: for them to be fulfilled, it is enough that missionaries should have enlightened a certain number of individual minds in the various parts of the inhabited earth, and that, on each deserted and remote hillside, the Cross should have been raised at least once." (p.16)

Fr. Arminjon is not of this Evangelism Lite, and cites St. Jerome and St. Bede, that the Word of God must be preached and "understood in the most strict and literal sense." Cornelius Lapide claims that Christianity must be "established and organized" and "subsisted at the level of a public institution."

Under this definition, we probably have a little ways to go in places like the Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Europe. But this could change rapidly, as even in Iraq, a country that is 97% Muslim, we find 19% of the population watch Sat-7 Christian broadcasting in Arabic, Farsi and Turkish.

Holy Love - Divine Mercy


April 19, 2009

Midnight Service at the United Hearts Field - Feast of Divine Mercy

Heaven Speaks to the Heart of the World

(Specifically the path the world is taking.)

(This message was given in multiple parts over several days.)

Jesus is here as He is in the Divine Mercy Image; there is a huge Flame behind Him. He says: "I am your Jesus, born Incarnate. I come to you tonight from the Will of the Eternal Father Whose Flame of Love you see behind Me.."

"My brothers and sisters, I come to you as your Merciful Jesus. Those who love Me understand My Mercy and My Love, which are one. These are the ones that allow My Mercy and My Love to shine through them into the world. These are the ones who understand the call of My Heart to repentance of each soul. I will refuse no one who turns to Me with a repentant heart."

"Today the foundation of a one-world government has been laid through the global economic collapse which Satan has orchestrated. As this unfolds, remember that your free will remains intact. No one can dictate the affections of your heart. Live always in Holy Love. Remain calm; be at peace. If your heart is steeped in love of God and love of neighbor, you are safe, for I am with you."

"Hope, indeed, springs eternal for those who place their trust in Me. See in all world events the coming of the Kingdom of the Divine Will of My Father. Believe in this Kingdom--the New Jerusalem--which is alive in hearts living in Holy Love."

"Those who have made hatred into a 'religion' will destroy themselves. They cannot succeed, for Truth will be victorious. Holy Love is the Heart of Truth. In truth I tell you, it is now the hour of decision. Take up the weapons of prayer and sacrifice as I call together My army* against evil. My victims of love are the officers in this spiritual army. I tell you, the battle against evil must be won in hearts before it is won in the world."

"During these decisive and difficult times, it is important to realize that conflict and wars arise in hearts because of conflict with the Commandments of Love. God desires all of creation to be in harmony with His Divine Will. This is why He has created this apparition site and this Mission. The more that people accept and surrender to Holy Love, the greater the graces poured out here. Therefore, with hearts that emulate Divine Mercy and Divine Love, make the messages known."

"My Mercy will never be depleted, but the dawn of My Divine Justice is at hand. Satan seeks to destroy all that is good and loving, using people and nature to accomplish his goals. Depend on Divine Mercy and Divine Love to see you through the worst of times. From My Love and My Mercy flows My Provision."

"I invite you to realize that when the Holy Love in your heart is compromised, every virtue begins to erode. It is as if the roots of a great tree were Holy Love. The trunk would be humility; the blossoms on this great tree are the different virtues. The roots and the trunk (love and humility) must remain healthy for the whole tree to be healthy. In the spiritual life, Holy Love and Holy Humility feed and support all the other virtues. Therefore, if Holy Love erodes, faith and hope are weakened. If humility is compromised, the rest of the tree of virtues begins to wither."

"Within each soul is this mystical tree of virtue; it gives life or else it withers and dies. In society this tree of virtue is necessary towards world peace. If it is ignored and not watered with Holy Trust, the world around the tree suffers. This is what leads to lack of peace in hearts."

"You may wonder at My depiction of personal holiness as this tree of virtue. But I invite you to see that each soul's journey or growth in holiness affects the heart of the world, for the heart of the world is a composite of the hearts of all its citizenry. The tree of virtue in the heart of the world is drying up from lack of care. In its place is the tree of antipathy towards God and His Commandments. The roots of this tree are hatred; the trunk is arrogant pride; the blossoms are not blooms but rather spoiled fruit--each one opposing virtue. This tree is beginning to thrive, nourished by man's over-indulgent trust in himself--through self-love."

"With a compassionate heart for the spiritual crisis in the heart of the world, realize that the tree of virtue stretches heavenward towards perfection in God's Will. On the other hand, the tree of antipathy towards God suffers from neglect and lack of care and takes on a countenance of death. Unless the gardener notices this poor tree, it will face a grim future."

"This is why I have come here--to draw attention to the state of the heart of the world. My plea is urgent. Nourish your hearts with the food of virtue. Do not be motivated by self-love, but by love of God and neighbor. This is what will redirect the future of the world. Otherwise, all that is good in the world will wither and die. With a Merciful Heart, I tell you these things."

"In My Mercy and My Love, I come to tell you that the threats against democracy are very real. Even within the borders of your country, certain ones bear arms of hatred and evil against good. New challenges against world peace are very dominant in hearts. Come to realize that your prayers and sacrifices are all that stands in the way of Satan's destructive plans. Your efforts towards personal holiness must proliferate as a strong crop in a fertile field. Do not hide the light of Holy Love that is in your heart for any reason. Let it blaze forward illuminating the darkest soul. Bring souls to My Love and My Mercy. You can secure the borders of your country, but if the boundaries of your heart are not secure in Holy Love, Satan will enter like a thief in the night."

"This is what has happened in governments near and far.. This is how Satan has infiltrated the United Nations, the ranks of Church leaders and the liberal policies concerning marriage and life. The ones whom you should be able to turn to for help have been rendered helpless by Satan's compromise. You must use My Commandments of Love--Holy Love--both as the weapon and the solution."

"Realize that I must tell you these things in truth, for these times are evil and Satan's lies are unrelenting. You cannot trust people because of their esteemed title in the world or even in the Church. This current Pope lives in truth and is a staunch supporter of the Tradition of Faith. Sadly, there are many of title under him who do not do so. You can see readily how faith has been attacked in the numbers of Catholics who do not support life at conception, do not believe in Purgatory, and sadly some do not even believe Satan exists. Heaven's interventions, such as the one here, are most often scandalized and then condemned by the very ones who need guidance the most. But Satan will not prevail here. Rejoice in that!"

"My brothers and sisters, tonight I am releasing from Purgatory relatives of those here present who have spent long periods of time, and short periods of time, in the prison of Purgatory for worshipping the false god of reputation. My Mercy and My Love are One with the Will of My Father. I desire to spread My Mercy across the face of the earth together with My Love. You must help Me with your prayers and your sacrifices, for this is a desperate hour. I love you, My brothers and sisters, and will not abandon you."

"Tonight I'm blessing you with My Blessing of Divine Love."

* Jesus' spiritual army is the army of souls called to Divine Victimhood.

Apr 21, 2009

The End of the World



Not Yet. And No predictions here, as only God the Father knows the Day or Time


But Fr. Charles Arminjon has written an excellent book that puts a lot of the pieces in place, and clears up much of the confusion surrounding the Rapture. There will be signs, but Jesus reminds us "These signs are not just calamities and revolutions in the stars, but events of a public character, pertaining to both the religious and the social order, which mankind cannot fail to perceive." (p.16)






First, the Word of God must be proclaimed throughout the whole world. (Mt 24:14)
Second, the man of sin, the son of Perdition, the Anti-Christ will appear (2Thes2:2-4)
Third, the conversion of the Jews (Rom 11:14-17)

Apr 11, 2009

The Bitter Pill

Contraception: The Bitter Pill from Holy Spirit Interactive
by George Sim Johnston

[Jay's Note: As I like to say, you can't put on condom over your heart]

Each month, to test our courage, my wife Lisa and I stand before an auditorium full of couples about to marry in the Catholic Church and explain to them the Church's teachings about sexuality. The crowd is generally not happy to be there. Many are not Catholic and few, needless to say, want to hear what the Church has to say about sex and contraception. They've heard it already on the afternoon talk shows from renegade nuns. This is, moreover, the upper east side of Manhattan, a tough market for Humanae Vitae.

We tell our restive audience that what they are about to hear is counter-cultural. We try to pique their curiosity: What arguments can there possibly be against using the pill? Proof texts are lacking in Scripture and we wouldn't use them anyway. The last thing you do with a crowd of post-baby boom Catholics is argue from the top down. What we have to do is persuade them that getting rid of their pills and diaphragms will actually make them happier. Then, gently, we can slip in a few natural law arguments about sex and babies.

The challenge is to put the cultural coordinates back to where they were seventy years ago. Until 1930, not only did every Christian denomination teach that contraception is wrong, but even the mainstream of media and politics did not approve of it. The ubiquitous state laws against selling birth control devices were the work of Protestant, not Catholic, legislatures. When, at the Lambeth Conference in 1930, the Anglican Church became the first Christian body to change its mind about contraception, the Washington Post was as indignant as Pope Pius XI. It seemed self-evident to at least a plurality of Christians that the deliberate obstruction of the life-making potential of sex is a gravely disordered act.

Disrupting Marriage
The use of contraceptives did not really take off until the advent of the pill in the early '60s. At the time, the pill was heralded as a great boon to married couples because it would remove from sex the fear of pregnancy. The divorce rate in America was 25 percent. It proceeded to double quite rapidly. While there were a number of reasons for this general breakdown of marriage, the pill certainly contributed. One obvious reason is that it makes infidelity easier by taking babies out of the picture. It also turns premarital sex into a recreation like tennis or bungee jumping, so that many enter marriage with a consumerist attitude toward sex that is easily bored and dissatisfied.

But there are more profound reasons why the pill is so disruptive to marital happiness. It has to do with the nature of sexuality itself. Sex, we tell our audience, is a mystery that can never be reduced to mere biology. It has a meaning far beyond the physical act of love. In The Graduate when Mr. Robinson confronts young Benjamin Braddock about his adultery with Mrs. Robinson, Benjamin defends himself by saying that it was no big deal: "Mrs. Robinson and I might just as well have been shaking hands." Mr. Robinson gets even more upset, and rightly so; because behind Benjamin's statement is a gnostic separation of spirit and flesh, of heart and body, which even the dimmest of cuckolds can sense is utterly wrong.

Our culture has been able to turn sex into a casual activity because it has separated personhood from the human body. Most people have the idea that their real self is somewhere inside the proverbial ghost in the machine and that what they do with their bodies doesn't make much difference. But this has never been the view of the Church, which teaches that the body is not a mere appendage, but is as much a part of us as our soul. After all, we don't say in the Nicene Creed that we believe in the immortality of the soul, but in the resurrection of the body. In a very significant way, we are what we do with our bodies.

The Old Testament uses a very interesting verb for sex: to "know." One of the things we surrender in the act of love is knowledge about ourselves that only our spouse should have. Nobody has written about these aspects of sex more profoundly than John Paul II in Love and Responsibility (1959). In that book, the future philosopher-pope argues further that each person is an irreducible subject "a person, not a thing," who ought never to be used as an object. As we know, sex is an appetite which has a tendency to do just that: to treat persons as objects. A couple can easily slip into treating one another as objects, as things to be used in bed, rather than as persons giving and receiving the spousal gift of love. And this may be why so many couples are bored by modern sex: You can tire of an object, while you can never tire of a person.

There is also the matter of babies. God's first command to humanity was to be fruitful and multiply. For those made uncomfortable by divine injunctions, the most elementary biology textbook will explain that sex is for making babies. And since sex is such a deep part our identity, it may be that when you sterilize the baby-making potential of sex, you are doing damage to yourself.

Artificial contraception is wrong because it violates the gift of self that ought to be at the center of every act of physical love. When you take the pill or use a foam, diaphragm, condom, or whatever, you are, in effect, saying to your spouse, "In this, the most intimate act of our marriage, I am going to give myself to you, but only up to a point." Or, conversely, you are saying, "I want you in this act to make a total gift to me of yourself, except that part of you which so deeply defines you as a sexual being, your fertility."

The body has its own deep language, and when we add chemicals or latex to the act of love, when we deliberately destroy its potential for making new life, we falsify the nuptial meaning of its actions. We hold back the full gift of self which during the wife's fertile period must include an openness to new life.

A couple who use artificial birth control are not only falsifying the meaning of sex, they are also behaving immaturely: trying to extract gratification from an act while getting rid of its natural consequences. It is not unlike certain eating disorders.

Chesterton put it well when he said that birth control "is a name given to a succession of different expedients by which it is possible to filch the pleasure belonging to a natural process while violently and unnaturally thwarting the process itself."

Child Spacing and NFP
At this point, an obvious objection appears on the faces in our audience. Is the Church telling us that we have to have one baby after another? What about my career? And my health? But the Church recognizes that there are legitimate reasons for spacing children. All that is asked is that a couple be generous and not put selfish motives first. And besides, the best thing you can do for a child is to provide siblings. It is, paradoxically, more difficult to do a good job bringing up one or two children than three or four.

If the arrival of children needs to be spaced (a job once done quite effectively by full-time breast-feeding), there is a morally acceptable way of doing it: Natural Family Planning. NFP is one of the best-kept secrets in the Catholic Church (and the medical profession), and most of our pre-cana audience is no doubt hearing about it for the first time.

The general ignorance surrounding NFP is a real tragedy, because couples who use it almost universally report what a boon it is to their marriage. NFP is not "Catholic birth control." Nor is it the calendar rhythm method, which has a 15 percent failure rate and went out the window decades ago. It is a method whereby both partners exercise restraint during the wife's fertile period, which is determined by a few simple symptoms. Used correctly, it is more effective than the pill. And it ought to be noted that the more effective an artificial contraceptive is, the more potentially harmful side-effects there are for the wife.

An obvious question occurs to our audience, one that is a stumbling block for any number of otherwise clever theologians: Since artificial contraception and Natural Family Planning have the same goal -- to postpone the arrival of a child -- what is the moral difference between them? Why should a little piece of plastic or a small dose of hormones be such a big deal?

But NFP and artificial contraception do not, strictly speaking, have the same goal, since NFP is used by couples to help conceive as well as to space children, while artificial contraception is used only to block conception. (A dividend of the sexual revolution is that one in six couples now have trouble conceiving, which gives NFP additional marketing appeal.) And even when the goal is the same -- the postponement of a child -- everyone would agree that the means used to achieve a goal can be either good or bad. For example, if you need a hundred dollars, you can either rob a bank or earn the money.

When it comes to spacing children, there is all the difference in the world between sex that is nonprocreative, because it takes place during the infertile part of the wife's cycle, and sex that is antiprocreative. The couple using NFP is accepting their fertility as it is: a great good, but a good which they are not going to use at this time. The husband respects his wife's cycle and does not try to manipulate it.

But a couple on artificial birth control is treating their fertility as though there were something wrong with it, something that has to be gotten rid of by medication or barrier. (The latter is a revealing term: "I want to make love to you, I want to give myself to you, but first let me put in my barrier.") A pill is what you take when you have an illness: couples who use contraceptives are treating their fertility, whose depth and mystery they ought to revere, as a defect in need of a technological fix.

The Fork in the Road
The Church does not teach that an act is evil because it makes people unhappy, but it does affirm that evil acts will inevitably have that result. Women who use contraceptives often complain that they feel like they are being used as objects and that their sex life is flat. Couples who use NFP never seem to have this problem. In the latter case, the wife, whose sensitivity in this area is usually keener, has the assurance that her husband loves her enough to practice self-control. And besides, abstinence is the best of aphrodisiacs. There is nothing like periodic continence to keep one's sex life interesting. It's like going on a honeymoon twice a month. A Jewish rabbi once told New York magazine that orthodox Jewish women, who have to abstain from sex for a period after menstruation, universally report that periodic continence keeps their sex fresh and entertaining.

In the end, couples who use NFP and those who use contraceptives are living two radically different versions of physical love. One accepts the gift of sexuality exactly as it is stamped in the human person by God; the other rejects it. And this severing of life and love is not healthy for a marriage. In fact, a void can open up in the love life of a contracepting couple, a void that is usually first noticed by the wife. Two statistics tell the whole story: The divorce rate among couples who use NFP is somewhere between 1 and 3 percent, while the divorce rate among couples who use contraceptives is well over the 50 percent national rate.

This is the message of Humanae Vitae that nobody gets: When you try to short-circuit the procreative end of sexuality, you also hurt the unitive. There is simply no way of separating them.

There is another unseemly aspect of the pill that is only now getting attention: its strong causal link to abortion. In one respect, "contraceptive" is a misnomer for the pill, because it sometimes does its work after conception by preventing the fertilized egg from implanting in the mother's womb. In other words, it is an abortifacient. But the link to abortion goes further. The essence of the contraceptive mentality is to drive a wedge between sex and babies. Once a society does this and goes on a spree of sterilized sex, it has to have abortion as a backup in case a contraceptive fails or (as happens with teenagers) isn't pulled out of the pocket at the critical moment.

The Church's insistence on the link between contraception and abortion occasionally gets support in surprising quarters. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey the U.S. Supreme Court, on its perennial search for the most plausible-sounding sophistries to uphold legalized abortion, stated:

[F]or two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail.

In other words, we need abortion so that people can continue their contraceptive lifestyles.

Not Animals
The clash over contraception in the final analysis involves two irreconcilable views of the human person and sexuality. Humans are not brute animals; we are created in the image of God. We do not reproduce, we procreate; and the place to look for an ethics of sexuality is not in the rest of the animal kingdom, but in the other direction, at the three persons of the Holy Trinity in the act of eternal, mutual self-giving. The entire Christian world once understood this, and Protestants who think that this is no longer an issue ought to examine their own heritage. Luther and Calvin both taught that artificial birth control is intrinsically evil. So did Karl Barth, who wrote Paul VI a warm letter of praise after the publication of Humanae Vitae. The modern world has evacuated the marital act of its mystery and sanctity and it is sad that most denominations have gone along, hesitantly at first, only to proceed enthusiastically.

Much of the official Catholic apparatus also goes flopping along with the contraceptive culture. Many pre-cana programs actually promote artificial birth control, which means that they indirectly promote abortion. The pope, as usual, has a deeper insight than his middle management into the centrality of contraception in the array of life issues. In Evangelium Vitae, the first institutional step he proposes in the battle against the culture of death is the establishment of teaching centers for natural methods of regulating fertility. Unfortunately, the laity get little encouragement in this area. This is partly because the progressive wing of the Church, which controls most of the chanceries and seminaries, has never focused on Natural Family Planning. They consider it part of the baggage of Humanae Vitae, a document they shun like a vampire avoids sunlight.

Still, there are reasons to be optimistic that contraceptives will someday go away. At the end of each of our marriage preparation sessions, couples who seem to have little use for most Church teachings come up and say that NFP actually sounds like a good idea. Women, in particular, may decide on purely feminist grounds that artificially thwarting their fertility is demeaning. And, so far as the intellectual debate goes, Chesterton, our guide and mentor, made the amusing observation that "the more my opponents practice Birth Control, the fewer there will be of them to fight us."

Or, as a friend of mine once put it: "Be optimistic, the readership of the New York Times is not replacing itself."

Train Wreck a coming

In a New York Times article on Same-Sex Marriage, Peter Stenfels gives a rare balanced portrayal of the current social and legal landscape, including the big question: Is same-sex marriage on a collision course with religious liberty?

Pro-Same-Sex Marriage advocates like Cass Sunstein, a constitutional scholar at the University of Chicago Law School, have admitted that in a whole range of issues which, "pointed to conflicts that were 'real and serious.'" Chai R. Feldblum, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and [also] a proponent of same-sex marriage, agrees that permitting gay couples equal access to civil marriage will inevitably burden the religious liberty of those religiously opposed.

In a previous comments section I argued with JHG that since the Civil Right to same-sex marriage has been granted albeit on a limited basis, any Religious Conscience clause would of necessity have to be struck down by the Courts. What I call the redefinition of marriage into a Civil right for a group of people (LGBT) has simultaneously defined those of us who believe marriage to be between one man and one woman into racists, and no racist beliefs are allowed in this country.

Therefore Same-sex marriage as a Civil Right gives people "the right to work in areas where their presence might constitute a contradiction to your [religious or personal] teachings." These were JHG's words, and he actually agrees with me on this point, but I said the fact that he was on my side on this one is no consolation and would prevent nothing of this encroachment of the State into the Church.

If we had kept the legal debate to a debate of individual rights, we would have discussed individual rights; can a GLBT individual form a relationship with another individual and be granted rights such as hospital visitation, health proxy, inheritance, and other rights? But same-sex marriage has outlawed religious and personal beliefs that do not affirm the Naturalness and indeed the goodness of same-sex sex.

Many see that same-sex marriage will create conflicts with the religious liberty of institutions and individuals rejecting such marriages on religious grounds, though there is no agreement on how serious those conflicts are or how they might be resolved. But Marc D. Stern, whose many years handling religious freedom cases for the American Jewish Congress firmly believes that legal recognition of same-sex marriage will make clashes with religious liberty "inevitable." Stern sees a "train wreck" coming, one that can "be avoided only if advocates on both sides renounce what he called 'a winner take all' attitude."

No one seriously believes that a clergy will be forced to perform a GLBT marriage ceremony over his religious conscience objections, but Mr. Stern sees a multitude of conflicts for "schools, health care centers, social service agencies, summer camps, homeless shelters, nursing homes, orphanages, retreat houses, community centers, athletic programs and private businesses or services that operate by religious standards, like kosher caterers and marriage counselors." E.g. Boston Catholic Charities no longer provides any adoption services.

We shall see.

Apr 10, 2009

How to get labeled a hate group II

Summary: SPLC labels you a hate group if they disagree with your message, even just a little, even just once.

When Will the Southern Poverty Law Center Stop Bullying?
by Laurie Higgins, Director of IFI's DSA -Illinois Family Institute

Following our expose of the reason for the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) dubious and defamatory inclusion of the Illinois Family Institute (IFI) on their "anti-gay hate groups" list, the SPLC started receiving complaints, which evidently didn't sit too well with them. As a result of those complaints, the editor of their ironically named "Intelligence Report," Mark Potok, started leaving troubling voice messages around the country for those who called to complain.

Here's a transcription of one of those messages:

Yes, Hi, this is a message for . . . from Mark Potok, Southern Poverty Law Center. Very briefly, I just wanna say very briefly - we do list them (Illinois Family Institute) for a reason, which we've stated publicly. They (IFI) have been less, in my opinion, than honest about what we really said. They publish and promote the work of a man named Paul Cameron. Paul Cameron is a guy who is infamous for over the last 20 years for producing, for publishing fake studies that allege all kinds of terrible things about homosexuals. For instance, that gay men are, something like, 20 times more likely to molest children; that gay men have an average death age of something like 43 because they're so sickly and, ya know, sorta do such terrible things. These things are completely false and have been proven false long ago. Our view is that the Illinois Family Institute promotes these complete falsehoods. Then that is hateful activity. We never list any group on the basis of simply disagreeing morally or otherwise with homosexuality. We told the Illinois Family Institute directly that if they remove this material from their website, in fact, that we would take them off the list. Instead, what they've done is essentially launched an attack on us to try to get people to call us as you did. Anyway, that's all. I just wanted to at least briefly explain that it was not quite the way it was being portrayed.

Contrary to Mr. Potok's claim that the SPLC had publicly stated their reason for including IFI on their "anti-gay hate groups" list, to my knowledge, prior to my phone call to them, they had never publicly stated their reason. And stating their reason in a private phone conversation doesn't constitute a public statement. I believe it was I who stated their reason publicly. If I'm mistaken, I would like Mr. Potok to provide evidence for his claim that they had already publicly stated their reason.

After I heard his voice message in which he stated that IFI has "been less than honest," I called and spoke to Mr. Potok, informing him that in my article, I was scrupulously honest about what Heidi Beirich had said to me. In fact, I even included a link to a follow-up email Ms. Beirich had sent to me in which she restated the reason for the SPLC's inclusion of IFI on their hate groups list.

I told him that in my phone conversation with her, I even stopped her so that I could write down exact quotes, and I told her I was doing so. In my article I informed IFI readers that Ms. Beirich stated that the only reason we were on the anti-gay hate groups list was that we had posted one article three years ago by Paul Cameron and that if we took that one article down, the SPLC would remove us from the hate groups list. In my article, I explained that some of the claims that SPLC was making about Cameron's statements-if true-would be repellent to IFI, and that we were in the process of verifying the accuracy of the SPLC's claims.

Frankly, I don't know how I could have been more honest.

Mr. Potok stated in his voice message that we, IFI, "publish and promote the work of a man named Paul Cameron." This grossly misrepresents the nature of our involvement with Cameron's work. It suggests that we regularly or continually publish and promote the work of Cameron, when, by Potok and Beirich's own admission, we published only one brief article.

More troubling yet, this one article contained no statements remotely like those that Mr. Potok articulated in his voice message: "gay men are, something like, 20 times more likely to molest children" or that "they're so sickly and, ya know, sorta do such terrible things."

Mr. Potok then digs himself in even deeper when he says on tape that it is the SPLC's view that "the Illinois Family Institute promotes these (emphasis mine) complete falsehoods." "These" is a demonstrative pronoun referring back to the statements he just made. The problem is that he is suggesting that IFI promotes falsehoods that the SPLC's own evidence proves we did not promote. The SPLC's own evidence is the one three-year-old article that did not include any references to "child molestation," or "sickly homosexuals sorta doing terrible things." Mr. Potok was either stunningly careless with his rhetoric or deliberately manipulative.

I also explained to Mr. Potok that the one article from three years ago contained no hate rhetoric, and that it alone cannot possibly justify labeling IFI a hate group. I told him that simply quoting a source once does not mean that an organization supports or endorses everything that a source says or does.

I also explained that I would have no problem removing the article except that I want to provide evidence for our claim that the SPLC's reason for including IFI on a hate groups list is flimsy, unethical, irresponsible, unsavory, and manipulative.

People need to read for themselves the content of the article that the SPLC uses to justify labeling us a hate group in order to determine whether they, the public, think we deserve to be included on this list that schools and law enforcement agencies use. People need to read this one brief article that the SPLC claims is their sole reason for lumping us together with actual hate groups like the KKK.

I also asked Mr. Potok if we've been on their hate groups list since 2005 when the Cameron article was posted. He replied "No." I then asked when we were first listed, and he said 2008. So, they added us to their list in 2008 based on one brief article posted in 2003.

Mr. Potok continues with his turbo-charged rhetoric claiming that IFI "launched an attack" on the SPLC. Once again, his facts are slightly askew. IFI did not call for people to voice their opposition to the SPLC. But more importantly, phone calls of opposition hardly constitute an "attack."

Finally, since Mr. Potok was leaving voice messages all around the country claiming that I was being less than honest, I asked him if had even read my article. Surprise, surprise, he had not, and asked me to send it to him.

In light of the dubious and insubstantial reason the Southern Poverty Law Center has provided for including the Illinois Family Institute on their "anti-gay hate groups" list and their subsequent misleading, defamatory, and less than honest voice message, IFI is requesting that we be removed immediately from the SPLC's hate groups list, and we are requesting a formal public apology for our inclusion on this list and the voice message, both of which are damaging our reputation.

Apr 1, 2009

Until now.

A widespread non-system of impersonal sexual couplings has never occurred in any known society. In no known society have the ruling authorities, whether governmental or informal, been completely indifferent to the forms sexual couplings take, or the context in which sexual activity takes place. Nor has any belief system, whether religious or philosophical, ever claimed that sexual activity is intrinsically meaningless, having only the meaning individuals privately assign to it. Until now" (Morse, J. R. "Marriage and the limits of contract." Policy Review, April and May, 2005).