By Scott Ross, State Director, AFA of Ohio Foundation
July 1994 – Are those who believe in Judeo-Christian values and moral absolutes hateful, bigoted and intolerant toward homosexuals? If we truly love our fellow man, as we profess, shouldn’t we love and accept all people regardless of their behavior and lifestyle?
The truth is that disapproving of homosexuality is not a matter of intolerance. It’s a matter of public policy. The homosexuals have proudly published a 62-point agenda they hope to implement through legislation, federal spending, public education (starting at kindergarten), military code, state funded colleges and universities, health care reform, and even forced legal intrusion into private organizations such as the Boy Scouts of America and churches.
Homosexuals want their cause to become the civil rights issue of the ’90s. However, this battle for legal and constitutional recognition is based on behavior rather than the inborn, unchangeable and recognizable characteristics which define all other protected classes of people under the law. The homosexuals want special rights for a behavior – homosexual sex. But in 1986, the U.S. Supreme court said private, consensual sodomy is not a constitutional right. In fact, states are free to criminalize sodomy. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Burger wrote, “In constitutional terms there is no such thing as a fundamental right to commit homosexual sodomy.”
Homosexuals discount the behavior argument, claiming homosexuality is an orientation, possibly genetic. Hence, homosexuals want special rights so they can “feel attracted” to the same sex. However, laws are not based on feelings, laws are based on behavior.
Homosexuals claim that sexual orientation should be a protected class. Sexual orientation is defined as one’s sexual preference, whether expressed through sexual activity, affectional inclination or sexual identification. Hence, homosexuals argue protection should be based on what they think and feel rather than who they are or what they do. Sexual orientation is, in fact, thought processes and personal feelings. Laws should not and cannot be based on what people think or feel, but on behavior – in this case, homosexual sodomy.
No More Initiatives
While it is true that political victory is necessary for total success, the homosexuals can gain significant victory through the court system by winning legal protection and ultimately constitutional protection. As in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court could contrive a constitutional right from language that was never intended to apply to homosexuals – regardless of the fact that sodomy was illegal in all 13 original colonies.
There are presently two premier cases in the court system which will likely determine this issue for the nation – Colorado’s Issue 2 and Cincinnati, Ohio’s, Issue 3. These two initiatives limit government from enacting pro-homosexual legislation. Both of these initiatives have been overturned by the courts at every level as of this writing. Both of these cases are destined for the U. S. Supreme Court.
Until these two cases are resolved, laws and initiatives passed by the people will be challenged in court, with each new case providing a liberal judge another opportunity to create a constitutional right. Should the homosexuals win these cases in the highest court in the land, local and state initiatives would become unconstitutional.
Presently, homosexual behavior does not have constitutional protection. This can only be achieved through court challenges. Each time citizens or elected officials enact a law which limits government from passing legislation based on sexual orientation, it avails another opportunity for the homosexuals to achieve their goal through the courts.
Additionally, successfully proposing, passing and then defending a petition initiative is expensive and time consuming. Each new law and challenge is usually legally and technically unique, availing itself of the opportunity for a new precedent.
While initiatives which reflect the will of the people seem logical and proper, it is clearly bad strategy at this time of growing liberal leanings in the courts.
Pro-family activists should wait until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the Colorado and Cincinnati cases before attempting new legislation to limit homosexual laws.
The only initiative that should be considered is a direct repeal of special rights laws in their entirety that a city council or state legislature passes. A simple repeal has no constitutional risks.
The Problem
The problem facing those who want to preserve traditional family values is not special rights legislation, it is pro-homosexual politicians. While citizens’ initiatives may prevent pro-homosexual politicians from overtly promoting the homosexual agenda, these laws do nothing to prevent the many subtle ways of promoting the agenda through appointments and policies. Each level of involvement in government, elected or appointed, can be a stepping stone for any activist. Candidates who accept homosexual endorsements must also accept responsibility for promoting the homosexual agenda.
The homosexuals have been working behind the scenes politically for 20 years to win seats in city governments. One-hundred- thirty jurisdictions have passed special rights legislation laws granting legal recognition, endorsement and/or protection of homosexual, lesbian and bisexual people. City governmental positions are a profuse springboard to higher positions in state and federal government.
Over 30 jurisdictions have repealed laws that pro-homosexual elected officials have passed, but many of those same politicians are still in office appointing pro-homosexual people to other positions within government. These politicians are also typically aggressive in their support of abortion, pornography, condom distribution, sex education and other leftist causes.
Project Spotlight
How does a community develop a strategy to combat the homosexual agenda – an agenda that can only be achieved politically by winning political majorities at all levels of government? Homosexuals have made major progress toward that victory as evidenced by:
• 130 city councils passing homosexual legislation.
• State-supported universities promoting homosexuality through curriculum, counseling, and housing.
• A compromise to allow homosexuals in the military.
• The fact that the issue of homosexuals in the military was even debated by our country’s leaders in the House and Senate, when in the not too distant past the issue would have been scoffed at.
• The first open homosexual to be named to a senior government post: Roberta Achtenberg, Assistant Secretary of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
• Surgeon General and Attorney General with aggressive homosexual policies.
• A President of the United States who is aggressively committed to promote homosexuality.
To summarize, elected leaders, not laws, are the problem. Immoral laws are merely a symptom of immoral leadership.
While this issue can be lost from the top down, it cannot be won from the top down. We must win from the grass roots. We must take back our government and return to office pro-family leaders who believe in moral absolutes and Judeo-Christian values. That is where Project Spotlight comes in.
Project Spotlight has a two-fold goal: 1) Educate the public about the homosexual agenda. 2) Educate voters about every candidate who is pro-homosexual by identifying which candidates have been endorsed by the homosexuals and the values these candidates advocate to receive that endorsement.
Project Spotlight consists of four steps. First and most important, educate voters about the homosexual agenda through a well-organized program that begins far in advance of the city council election (minimum one year). Second, use every opportunity to register people to vote. Third, through each educational meeting and other channels, start a petition drive to gather signatures of registered voters. Finally, two weeks before an election, mail to every person who signed the petition a list of candidates who have been endorsed by the homosexuals and a list of those who have not.
Steps 1 and 2 above are 501(c)(3) non-profit activities. Step 3 is a Political Action Committee (PAC) activity. Item 4 could be considered 501(c)(3) or PAC activity depending on whether the information is presented in a bi-partisan, educational format or a political format in an attempt to influence an election.
The objectives of Project Spotlight are to hold candidates accountable for promoting the homosexual agenda and elect a majority of city council positions with candidates who oppose the homosexual agenda. Once accomplished, the new council can repeal previous homosexual special rights legislation.
This plan has already been effective in varied degrees in Louisville, Kentucky, and Cincinnati, Ohio. In 1991, Louisville city officials defeated an attempt to pass a Human Rights Ordinance by a city council vote of eight to four. Only one identified pro-homosexual candidate won an elected office.
Cincinnati voters approved Issue 3 in November 1993 by a 62% to 38% margin. Issue 3 repealed the protected class status special rights for homosexuals which city council passed one year earlier. While doing so, voters also elected three new pro-family candidates, replacing three incumbents who promoted the homosexual agenda. In both Louisville and Cincinnati, elected officials have distanced themselves from the homosexuals.
Every city must implement a plan to find candidates who are pro-family and willing to run for city council. One of the early leaders in Cincinnati who led the public campaign against the Human Rights Ordinance was Rev. Charlie Winburn. Mr. Winburn decided to run for city council and finished sixth in a nine seat race. This was the highest finish for a first-time candidate in Cincinnati history. He was highly visible and outspoken against special rights legislation for homosexuals.
Project Spotlight is a plan that avoids draining resources and manpower from pro-family organizations and avoids costly court cases that result from initiatives – court cases which could in fact lose the issue for the nation. This program addresses the causes by placing principled men in government, not the effects by passing legislation to neutralize bad laws. Any organization can work on this plan, making permanent changes in local government that benefit everyone on all pro-family issues.
Are you working to place this issue on the ballot in your city or state? Redirect your efforts, petitions, and resources to the root cause of the problem – elected officials. Network with other leaders who have fought this issue across the nation. Otherwise, your well-intended efforts could well be the Trojan horse of family values for the United States of America. 
For a 30-minute educational VHS video tape detailing the homosexual agenda, send $10 to AFA of Ohio Foundation, P.O. Box 60, Bethel, OH 45106
