Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality on Friday spoke to Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd, who insisted that the Obama administration wants to “give preference to somebody who is a homosexual to be a security guard” to guard embassies in countries like Libya. However, the job posting in question “does not list same-sex domestic partners of government employees as a prerequisite,” as Media Matters had already noted, but lists same-sex partners under their “Eligible Family Member” guidelines, which includes spouses, children and siblings. “It’s beyond dumb, I didn’t know that when Barack Obama was campaigning in 2008 that he was going to give us gay affirmative action,” LaBarbera said, “hey who is in favor of affirmative action based on aberrant, deviant sexual conduct.”
“We’ve seen this all over the world, the Obama administration is now promoting homosexuality as a ‘human right’ and they are in your face, going in Muslim countries and heavily Christian countries promoting homosexuality in their embassies, this is an incredible, revolutionary development,” he said.
“I don’t know those gay security guards, that’s who I want to defend me,” LaBarbera said. He went on to refer to the President as “Dictator Obama,” asserting that the job posting violates DOMA.
Mefferd: One of the things we’ve learned now is in the months leading up to the 9/11 attack on the consulate in Benghazi, the US embassy in Libya was seeking to hire two body guards with limited English language skills, we know this for about $13,000 a year, and in these job descriptions that the US embassy in Libya posted online they explicitly stated that they would give preference to filling these positions with qualified US citizens who were family members of US government employees and this included those with same-sex domestic partners. Now I’m thinking to myself, how does this jive with Libya? Don’t you think that’s a dumb idea, am I missing something here?
LaBarbera: It’s beyond dumb. I didn’t know that when Barack Obama was campaigning in 2008 that he was going to give us gay affirmative action, don’t you think that would have been an interesting point? Hey, who is in favor of affirmative action based on aberrant, deviant sexual conduct? See that’s an interesting concept but if you’re going to do it let’s do it in a Muslim country where homosexuals can actually be killed for practicing homosexuality and we’ve seen this all over the world. The Obama administration is now promoting homosexuality as a ‘human right’ and they are in your face, going in Muslim countries and heavily Christian countries promoting homosexuality in their embassies, this is an incredible, revolutionary development and it’s hardly even been a campaign issue.
Mefferd: And the silly part about it is why would you give preference to somebody who is a homosexual to be a security guard, what is the connection there?
LaBarbera: I don’t know. Those gay security guards, that’s who I want to defend me. But also what about DOMA? This is a violation of course of the spirit if not the law of the Defense of Marriage Act which is supposed to give preference to normal, male-female married spouses in our US government and Obama just said, ‘hey, we’re not going to follow that anymore,’ and just decided to make a new law.
Mefferd: Right, because he has been denigrating DOMA for a long, long time and has not defended it in court even though he is required to as the President of the United States to uphold federal law, he’s just not doing it and nobody is holding his feet to a fire on that. Does that drive you as crazy as it drives me that he just gets away with it?
LaBarbera: Yeah, you know Dictator Obama, hey, write a new law, we’re not going to enforce that law.
LaBarbera also lauded the American Family Association’s campaign to pull students from schools that participate in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Mix It Up at Lunch Day,” where students are encouraged to sit with their peers whom they don’t normally talk to or associate with. While he couldn’t find an example of how “Mix It Up at Lunch Day” promotes the “gay agenda,” he said the event should be opposed simply because it connects schools to the “anti-Christian” and “evil” SPLC.
What this event is, this seemingly innocuous event, of getting kids to sit next to somebody else during the lunch hour, but what this really is is luring the schools in, getting them hooked on the SPLC and later on they find out that the SPLC promotes homosexuality in the name of tolerance. This is one of their more innocuous activities but if you are allowing the SPLC in as an institution then you are saying essentially you agree with the SPLC’s concept of tolerance, which these days is a radically pro-homosexual agenda.
…
Their purpose is to get us out of media, to delegitimize us, to make it ‘oh why did you call that hate group, hey you don’t call the KKK every time you do a story on black people,’ which is the way they think. It’s evil, it’s really insulting to Christians, especially to African American Christians the idea that the opposition to homosexuality is analogous to being like a racist, that is an anti-Christian thought process that the SPLC is going through.
