By Jennifer Riley
CBS reportedly told a gay dating site that its proposed Super Bowl ad would be reviewed for possible airing and would be considered if a spot becomes available.
ManCrunch.com submitted a 30-second commercial to CBS on Jan. 18 and, as of Jan. 22, CBS reportedly said “the spot hadn’t been officially approved yet” by the network standards and that all spots for the big game on Feb. 7 had been sold out, according to Fox News. But CBS agreed to consider running the ad if an advertiser dropped out.
The ad involves two men watching the Super Bowl when their hands touch as they reach into a chip bowl. The two men then begin to kiss each other as another man sitting nearby watches in shock.
In response to the purported ad, a spokesperson for the conservative pro-family group American Family Association said it would be “totally irresponsible” of the network to air the ad during the most watched TV program of the year.
“CBS should not put parents in the position of answering embarrassing and awkward questions from their children while they’re just trying to enjoy a football game,” said Tim Wildmon, president of AFA, in a statement Thursday. “CBS should quit dithering around and reject this ad out of hand.”
In addition to pressure from pro-family groups, CBS is also coming under fire from pro-choice groups for approving an ad featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mom, Pam.
Though the exact content of the ad has not been revealed, many are speculating that it will recount Pam Tebow’s refusal to have an abortion while she was pregnant with Tim despite having suffered from a life-threatening infection at the time.
Focus on the Family, which produced the ad, said earlier this month that Pam Tebow would share a personal story centered on the theme of “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.”
“The Tebows said they agreed to appear in the commercial because the issue of life is one they feel very strongly about,” Focus on the Family reported.
“Tim and Pam share our respect for life and our passion for helping families thrive,” added Focus on the Family president and CEO Jim Daly.
Focus on the Family’s Super Bowl ad, which still needs to receive final confirmation, will be Christian group’s first Super Bowl commercial.
Super Bowl broadcasts are typically viewed by over 90 million people each year.
This year’s Super Bowl, which pits the Indianapolis Colts against the New Orleans Saints, will kick off at 6 p.m. ET on Sunday, Feb. 7.
Openly ‘gay’ Adam Lambert simulates sex acts with men on ABC broadcast
Editor’s Note: This story contains references to very objectionable adult material, which also is included in the video of the Lambert performance.
Openly homosexual former “American Idol” performer Adam Lambert shocked the American Music Awards audience last night by shoving dance team members’ faces into his crotch, leading others around on dog leashes and delivering a passionate on-stage kiss to his male keyboard player during theABC broadcast.
The performance of his new song, “For Your Entertainment,” marks his first public appearance since his “American Idol” competition loss to Christian Kris Allen.
According to the London Telegraph, Lambert was unapologetic to anyone who might have been offended, saying, “Maybe I’m not your cup of tea.”
Lyrics of the song included: “Hold on until it’s over. Can you handle what I’m about to do. It’s about to get rough with you.”
The video (Viewers please be aware this includes offensive material):
Shortly after word of the performance started spreading, the video was withdrawn from YouTube because of a “copyright claim” from Dick Clark Productions.
Immediately following the performance, Adam Lambert was the most trending topic on Twitter. Lambert was defiant on his Twitter page, proclaiming, “All hail freedom of expression and artistic integrity. … fans: I adore u.”
But viewers were not necessarily responding in kind. One observer described the performance as a “modern Sodom.” On a New York Daily News poll asking, “Do you think Adam went too far with his performance?” two out of three respondents agreed.
Sixty-four percent said, “It was unnecessary and inappropriate for television.” Only 24 percent said, “He took a risk and did something different that was worth watching.” Another 12 percent said the show would have been more appropriate for cable television.
Lambert’s provocative performance began with him dragging a leather-and-fishnet-clad dancer across the stage.
Wearing eye makeup and a pompadour, he then grabbed the head of a male dancer and pulled him into his crotch.
He broke off his gyrations long enough for a long kiss with his male keyboard player and finished with a high-pitched howl he’s known to deliver.
ABC producers were unaware of the planned same-sex make-out session, reports Rolling Stone. However, Lambert’s performance was advertised as “eye-popping” and something “you’d be talking about tomorrow.”
Lambert told Rolling Stone he didn’t do anything female performers haven’t done on television already – and that if ABC censored any part of his performance for the West Coast rebroadcast, it would amount to “discrimination.”
“It’s a shame because I think that there’s a double standard going on in the entertainment community right now,” Lambert told Rolling Stone backstage after the show at Los Angeles’ Nokia Theatre. “Female performers have been doing this for years – pushing the envelope about sexuality – and the minute a man does it, everybody freaks out. We’re in 2009; it’s time to take risks, be a little more brave, time to open people’s eyes and if it offends them, then maybe I’m not for them. My goal was not to piss people off, it was to promote freedom of expression and artistic freedom.”
The Telegraph reported the Federal Communications Commission was preparing for an onslaught of complaints over the graphic nature of the performance. The report said on Twitter and other Internet forums, watchers called the show “disgustingly vulgar.”
“Has ABC lost their minds? How on earth do they think airing this is OK?” wrote one forum participant.
Ironically, Sunday’s awards were opened by Janet Jackson, who was embroiled in controversy following her infamous “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. Pop star Justin Timberlake ripped off a portion of Jackson’s costume, exposing her breast to millions of viewers. The incident was investigated by the FCC and CBS was fined.
Lambert had been defeated on “American Idol” by Kris Allen, a mild-mannered Christian described as a “dark horse.”
The outcome of the vote stunned many who thought Lambert would be the victor.
“Huge upset,” said WFLX-TV news anchor Eric Roby, who said he and co-anchor Suzanne Boyd were shocked as they watched the program from their West Palm Beach, Fla., studio. “We were both screaming in the make-up room. Couldn’t believe it.”
Lambert had been dubbed a “rock god” by “Idol” judge Kara DioGuardi, a songwriter herself.
Simon Cowell, the judge known for his put-downs of less-than-stellar competitors, had predicted Lambert would win the contest and that he likely would become a worldwide star.
Homosexual former San Francisco leader Harvey Milk
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says he’s uncertain if the briefing material given to President Obama when he decided to award Harvey Milk a presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously included Milk’s well-documented advocacy for the late Jim Jones, the leader of the massacred hundreds in Jonestown, Guyana, in 1978.
The issue came up during a White House press briefing the day after President Obama included Milk, a homosexual leader in San Francisco who was victim of a murder, among those listed for the president’s Medal of Freedom awards.
“Is the president – concerning the Medal of Freedom awards, is the president aware of Harvey Milk’s strong support of the Rev. Jim Jones?” asked Les Kinsolving, WND’s correspondent at the White House.
“I don’t know if that was in the briefing material,” Gibbs said. “I can tell you the president is opposed to Jim Jones, how about that?”
Jones let a cult to the “Peoples Temple Agricultural Project” in the 1970s in Guyana after an extended career leading the religious organization in San Francisco.
The poisonings, including those of many children, followed by hours the murders of five people by Temple members at a nearby airport. One of the victims was Congressman Leo Ryan, the only member of Congress ever to die in the line of duty. He was investigating complaints about the cult.
Kinsolving, a journalist for the San Francisco Examiner during Jones’ ascent to power and influence there, shortly before he moved his cult to Guyana, recalled in a column just weeks ago the relationship between Jones and Milk.
His writing concerned the Sean Penn movie, “Milk.” Kinsolving cited columnist Dan Flynn’s concerns about “how Gus Van Sant could have made a film about Harvey Milk without casting a ‘Jim Jones’ role.”
The Flynn column accused Harvey Milk and “the San Francisco left” of allowing Jones to conduct his “criminal enterprise in San Francisco with impunity.”
“When veteran journalist Les Kinsolving penned an eight-part investigative report on Peoples Temple for the San Francisco Examiner in 1972, his editors buckled under pressure from Jones and killed the report halfway through,” wrote Flynn. “Kinsolving quipped that the Peoples Temple was ‘the best-armed house of God in the land,’ detailed the kidnapping and possible murder of disgruntled members, exposed Jones’ phony faith healing, highlighted Jones’ vile school-sanctioned sex talk with children and directed attention toward the Peoples Temple’s massive welfare fraud that funded its operations.
“Unfortunately four of the series of eight articles were jettisoned after Jones unleashed hundreds of protesters to the San Francisco Examiner, a programmed letter-writing campaign and a threatened lawsuit against the paper. The Examiner promptly issued a laudatory article on Jones. … ” wrote Flynn.
Kinsolving’s column revealed reports that after Milk was killed, all mention of connections between Milk and Jones “were intentionally obscured.”
Cited was the fact Milk “was a strong advocate for Peoples Temple and Jim Jones during his political career, including the tumultuous year leading up to the Jonestown tragedy. Milk spoke at the Temple often, wrote personal letters to Jim Jones…”
In another question, Kinsolving asked, “Does the president expect Israel to wait until they are nuclear bombed by Iran before they go after Iranian nuclear weaponry?”
Responded Gibbs, “Well, I think the president has said that countries make security decisions for themselves. All involved, led by the United States and others, are trying to do whatever is possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That’s our focus.”
Homosexuals planning for tomorrow’s Pride Charlotte festival in Charlotte, N.C., are enraged because the Coalition of Conscience has set up a Christian event, called “God Has a Better Way” nearby at the same time.
Michael Brown, who is director of the Charlotte-based coalition, said hundreds of people from area churches are coordinating the rally that will be unique.
“Nothing like this has ever been done in conjunction with a gay pride event in any city before, and those who join together on this day will be part of history in the making,” he said.
Brown told WND that when his ministry moved into Charlotte several years ago, his goal was to reach out to individuals with compassion and resist homosexual activism with courage.
But homosexual activists apparently aren’t listening.
At the pro-homosexual TruthWinsOut.org, a commentary said, “Brown has since launched an online initiative titled ‘God Has A Better Way,’ in which Brown claims that his agenda is ‘Spirit-birthed’ – a statement of sheer, unapologetic blasphemy.”
The website’s attack continued, “Brown refers to his crowd’s ‘biblical convictions’ but his ‘convictions’ in no way resemble the message of the Gospels or, for that matter, much of Hebrew Scripture. Brown appeals for gay people not to be mean-spirited – but he fully intends to remain as mean-spirited and warlike.”
Another site, InterstateQ, said, “This time, Brown’s twisted logic won’t be enough to save him from his own words. The disturbed and maniacal history of his verbally violent, militant and extremist rhetoric serves as its own ironclad indictment. He can no longer hide or run from this history, and neither can he sweep it under the rug.”
Sarcasm ruled on Lavender Liberal, which wrote, “‘We understand, of course, that in your eyes, our biblical convictions constitute hate, and it is hurtful to us that you feel that way.’ Awwwwww! It’s ‘hurtful’! Mikey’s dainty little feelers are hurt!“
The commentary continued, “If there is a god, or a thousand gods, or no god, you know nothing of the ‘love’ you have twisted, corrupted, and aborted from that Holy Book of yours. Your ‘message’ no more resembles that of your fabled Jesus than Pat Boone resembles Big Mama Thornton.”
Several of the condemnations of the Christian rally went further, too:
On the BoxTurtleBulletin site, “jimmy” said, “I will have my pepper spray, spring loaded baton and taser if these nutcases even get near me! I have used them before and will use them again on these nutjobs!”
Another comment on the “joemygod” site was, “Nail them all to crosses and let the corpses rot as a warning to other Jesus-pig people.”
Brown told WND that his event is supported by Lou Engle, the national director of “The Call to Action,” seeking to bring cultural change through prayer and fasting.
He also said other national ministries are looking at the model being used in Charlotte.
Brown said his “God Has a Better Way” rally will require participants to sign statements affirming, “I will not engage in hate speech, name-calling, or angry rhetoric; I will seek to befriend those who oppose me; I will seek to overcome bad attitudes with good attitudes; I will seek to be a living example of Jesus; I will not violate the law.”
“We have great love for the gay and lesbian community,” Brown said, “and have always treated them with dignity and respect; at the same time, we take strong exception to the gay activist agenda and will be sending a message to the city and the nation that God Has a Better Way.”
Rally participants will meet at Charlotte’s First Baptist Church at noon and will talk together to the Pride Charlotte rally. The group has a permit for an event on property across the street from the homosexual celebration.
Got questions about life, death, politics or religion? How about one on the topic of “gay” marriage?
It’s time for WWDD.
That’s not a typo on the familiar WWJD — “What Would Jesus Do?” — a theme among Christians. It stands for “What Would Dumbledore Do?” a new move to answer such questions and spark “social change” through the “teachings” available in the Harry Potter witchcraft books and movies. The campaign has begun specifically promoting “gay” marriage.
Not happy? Here’s what Dumbledore and Potter say:
To accept our reality exactly as it is and want nothing more than that reality is to stand in a place of self-acceptance. To accept oneself as we are right now can happen at this moment, but to accept oneself for a sustained period of time often times takes a lifetime of practice. But make no mistake: there is no higher joy.
Virtually no question theoretically isn’t answered by the beliefs and actions of the creations of author J.K. Rowling. For example, the following discussion on diversity offers a foreign policy position for the U.S. president:
In our world, wars often end because each side recognizes the others’ humanity. One small but profound example is Northern Ireland where Protestant women began attending the funerals of Catholic men – and vice versa. As these women gradually discovered that they were all suffering the loss of their husbands and sons, it was no longer the “other side” that was the enemy, but the war itself.
Conversely, the U.S. invasion of Iraq was led by an administration with very little background knowledge of the rich and diverse cultures in Iraqi society and a lack of curiosity to learn about them. The head of the original invasion, Paul Bremer, could not even speak Arabic and to this day the current administration continues to allow many of the small number of Arabic translators we do have to be fired for being gay. Imagine if this were different. Perhaps, if children and adults in both countries had formed friendships with each other, there never would have been a need for such a war in the first place. Some may call this wishful thinking. I believe Dumbledore would have called the building of friendships as an impediment to war, “realism.”
“Those things have been after-thoughts to the fanboys and girls who made ‘Star Trek,’ ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Lord of the Rings’ phenomena that had lives outside of the big and small screen. A little charity, here and there, but mainly those fans are about the faux reality of the world of their fixation – Trek on big screen and small, The Empire, The Rebel Alliance or Middle Earth.
“But not for Muggles,” the blogger wrote.
Poster from “Order of the Phoenix” movie
The wildly popular Harry Potter books, movies and characters have faced criticism for attacking the Judeo-Christian values on which the United States was built.
WND columnist Ben Shapiro earlier raised objections when author Rowling suddenly announced Dumbledore was homosexual.
“When J.K. Rowling announced … that Albus Dumbledore, the aged headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, was gay, I was somewhat confused. When did the old dude with the funky beard turn into Gore Vidal? According to Rowling, Dumbledore was always Gore Vidal,” Shapiro wrote.
“Why did Rowling surreptitiously plant a creepy subtext in the most popular children’s book of all time? She didn’t. By most accounts, there is nothing in any of the books to suggest that Dumbledore is gay. It’s easy enough for Rowling to retroactively adopt politically correct attitudes about homosexuality – she never had to face the public scrutiny that surely would have ensued had she made Dumbledore openly gay. Instead, she raked in over $1 billion by appealing to kids and their parents, then conveniently announced Dumbledore’s orientation before a swooning fan base in New York,” he wrote.
“Aside from the fact that these children are exposed to ugly creatures, fantastic violence and worthless incantations, this movie has some dialogue that sounds like it comes out of Stuart Smalley’s Daily Affirmations on ‘Saturday Night Live.’ Namely, when professor Dumbledore sits Harry down and tells him, ‘You are not a bad person. Every person has light and darkness. You have a choice,’” Baehr wrote.
“Imagine saying this to Cho Seung-Hui after he had his killing spree at Virginia Tech. Or Adolf Hitler. … Contrary to Dumbledore’s idiotic aphorisms, there are bad people,” he wrote.
“For those who don’t care about the occult worldview in the ‘Harry Potter’ books and movies, which reinforces this rampant selfish solipsism, they should care about this insane condoning and tolerating of malignant narcissistic behavior. For instance, one woman several years ago told me that she always took her children to see ‘Harry Potter.’ After her little boy talked back to her, kicked at her and annoyed her, I said that I could see he’s learned his scripts of behavior from dear old Harry,” he continued.
“Witchcraft means rebellion against God’s authority in the Bible. These books and movies teach rebellion against authority. When they add to this rebellious attitude the stupid aphorism that ‘you’re really a good person,’ then one must seriously ask: What are these narcissistic children supposed to think?”
The Harry Potter Alliance website says it is using the next Harry Potter film “to coordinate the entire Harry Potter fandom, harnessing new media and the night of the movie release to promote social change.”
Twitter, Facebook and its own website, whatwoulddumbledoredo.org, will be put into the action.
“Fans will take worldwide actions … to create a larger discussion for how the lessons of Albus Dumbledore can be translated into our lives and toward a global transformation,” the website says.
Alliance Executive Director Andrew Slack wrote, “In just two weeks, millions of theater goers will watch the shocking death of Harry’s mentor Albus Dumbledore followed by Harry stating that Dumbledore will live on in all who remain loyal to his spirit.
“Although Dumbledore is a fictional character, his presence remains real in the hearts of Harry Potter fans and his message, much like the message of such real life figures as Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama, is needed in our world.”
Moviegoers are being encouraged to share a lesson that Dumbledore taught them, and various fan sites are asking their supporters to “tweet” Dumbledore “with the hope that each time people do, they’ll think of what he stood for and how he lives on in each of us.”
Ultimate, the 100 online lessons “articulate how Dumbledore’s values can be translated to our personal lives.”
And beyond that, the “Doctrine,” teaches how those “values” ultimately “can be translated onto the national and global stage into public policy that legalizes same sex marriage, indigenous people’s rights, the Employee Free Choice Act, and media reform while joining the HPA’s partner NGO’s in their stand against genocide, poverty, prison torture, and global warming.”
On the blog forum, came this response from Amanda: “This is awesome! The Harry Potter books and Dumbledore have lots of great advice on how to have a better world. I am so taking part in this.”
The alliance, which describes itself as a non-profit that “engages Harry Potter fans in social activism,” lists study subjects on its website including bravery, choices, diversity, equality, friendship, happiness, living fully, loss, personal power and race.
The movie, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” is set to launch July 15.
By Dean Nelson(Telegraph.co.uk)
Campaigners described the ruling as “India’s Stonewall moment,” a reference to historic riots by homosexuals in New York which are regarded as the inspiration of the modern gay rights movement.
Same-sex couples with rainbow-painted faces kissed openly at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar monument in jubilant scenes which would have been unthinkable in conservative India before the ban was lifted.
The ban on homosexual relations was introduced by British colonial officials and describes sexual intercourse between people of the same sex as an “unnatural offence.”Indian government officials maintained the British line until shortly after the Congress Party returned to power with a stronger grip on government.
Senior officials had said same sex relationships were “indecent,” against Indian values, and if decriminalized would lead to an increase in delinquent behaviour and pose a health hazard to society.
“Every citizen has the right to lead a decent and moral life in society and the right would be violated if such behaviour is legalised in the country,” officials had submitted.
Their argument was rejected yesterday by Delhi’s High Court judges who said the ban denied gays equal rights and was an affront to human dignity.
“In our view Indian Constitutional Law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconception of who the LGBTs (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) are. It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster dignity of every individual,” the judges commented.
Their ruling will take precedence over India’s Penal Code until the parliament passes a new law on equality.
Celebrating campaigners, who until the ruling could have faced life sentences for having same sex relationships, said the historic decision for Indian homosexuals represented a vital first step in a new challenge to secure the same financial and social rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples.
“This is a victory for human rights not just homosexuals. It’s a remarkable step. This will defiantly encourage people to come out openly and express their sexual preferences. But this is just a milestone we have achieved. Now we will fight for the right to same sex marriages, adoption of kids, right to own property. The society will now accept us,” said Manish Kabir, a gay rights activist.
Religious groups, including leading muslim clerics and catholic clergymen, said despite the judgment, they still regarded homosexuality as immoral.
Ahmed Bukhari, the chief imam at Delhi’s historic Jama Masjid mosque, said: “This is absolutely wrong. We will not accept any such law.”
In fact India has had mixed feelings towards homosexuals. Hundreds of thousands of ‘hijras’ or eunuchs, mainly homosexual men who have been castrated and dress as women, are revered and their blessings are sought by conservative families for weddings and new births.
Manvendra Singh Gohil, the scion of the Rajpipla royal family, is still set to be India’s first openly homosexual maharajah after his family reconciled with him. When he first came out, following a nervous breakdown in 2005, villagers burned pictures of him and his family issued press notices stating he was no longer their son.
Many homosexuals have suffered violent attacks from their relatives and others and have been forced from their homes, and experts say criminalisation has been a factor in the spread of HIV/AIDS.
But homosexuals will try to ‘bypass voters,’ says legal expert
Seven more states have seen voters reject the idea of “gay marriage ” by implementing constitutional amendments that protect the biblical concept of holy matrimony – that is between one man and one woman only.
But legal experts are warning that homosexuals undoubtedly will try to bypass the will of voters however they can.
“When you look at the country as a whole, it’s obvious where Americans stand on marriage. But the battle is not over. The opposition will continue to attempt to bypass the will of the people,” said Glen Lavy, senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund.
In this election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina , South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. Colorado voters went even one step further, emphatically rejecting a referendum that would have allowed the extension of benefits to “domestic partners,” a plan that would have created an “alternate marriage” plan for homosexuals.
The vote in Arizona on that state’s proposal was awaiting a final outcome because of large numbers of early ballots that hadn’t been counted yet, officials said.
The ADF, although not an activist group, has been involved extensively in defending marriage amendments from court challenges.
“This is another victory in the ongoing battle to protect marriage and what’s in the best interests of our children,” said Lavy.
But he said the nation needs marriage amendments “on both the state and federal level because they are the only way to prevent special interests from using the courts to sidestep the will of the people.”
“Political special interests shouldn’t trump what’s in the best interest of families and children. Who’s more important: our children or special interest groups?” he said.
To date, in 27 states where a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage has been proposed, voters have adopted it, with Arizona’s outcome pending.
“Americans clearly don’t want same-sex ‘marriage,’” he said. “Marriage is a national issue and the national results speak for themselves. Poll and national poll shows Americans want marriage defined as one man and one woman.”
He said more information about protecting marriage is available at www.domawatch.org, which stands for Defense of Marriage Act, state laws that also have been used to protect marriage.
In Virginia, Victoria Cobb’s group called Family Foundation lobbied for the proposal .
“We knew all along that a majority favored the amendment. It was just a matter of getting people to the polls,” she said. “Tonight, this issue has been settled.”
The vote to ban “gay” marriage in South Carolina came on a nearly 4-1 division, and supporters say such constitutional amendments are not nearly as likely to be overturned by activist and liberal judges as state laws, which already had been used in several states to provide some level of protection for traditional marriage.
The protection for traditional marriage, before this election, had been approved by voters in 20 out of the 20 states where it had been proposed.
“The best that they (traditional marriage opponents) can do is confuse the issue,” States Issues Analyst Mona Passignano, of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action, told WND as the campaigns for the marriage protections gained speed in recent weeks.
“What they’re running up against is that people just want traditional marriage protected,” she said.
During 2005, Texas and Kansas voters approved marriage protection amendments, and in the sweep of the 2004 vote, 13 states took the same action, including voters in Arkansas, Georgia , Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Utah, Michigan, Ohio and Oregon who did so on the same night. Missouri and Nevada also voted for the plan. Five other states had done so in earlier elections and another two dozen states have taken the same action, but by statute, not constitutional amendment.
Wisconsin’s victory was especially gratifying for campaign workers in that state. There state lawmakers went through the process a second time after first passing a Defense of Marriage law in 2003, only to see Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle veto it. The second time around, for this year’s election, they pursued the constitutional amendment process, which does not require a governor’s signature.