According to the AFA, homosexuality is “…a sin grievous to God, and repulsive to Christians because it rejects God’s design for mankind as heterosexual beings.” Since the AFA was founded by a Methodist minister, their convictions originate from religious teachings. The AFA is strongly opposed to all aspects of the gay liberation movement, including efforts of the movement to promote the legalization of same sex marriage, to gain protection from discrimination similar to racial minorities, and continued efforts on the part of the movement to “normalize” homosexual behavior. For instance, they are opposed to the legal protection of homosexual people from losing their jobs, or not getting jobs because this would be further normalizing homosexual behavior.
According to the AFA president, Wildmon, the AFA “…does not approve
exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do [it] wish
to prohibit , by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting
adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves
be considered evil.”
Abortion is an issue that the AFA strongly opposes. According
to the AFA, it was 25 years ago when Roe vs. Wade changed the face of America
by legalizing the killing the innocent. AFA is a staunch defender
of life. David Miller, Director of State and Local Affiliates of
the AFA, claims that abortion is the holocaust of today. “Our holocaust
victims are the estimated 37,000,000 babies that have died over the
last 26 years since the Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion.”
AFA holds the social constructionist view as they explain their belief
that society “…has created an atmosphere in this country that says
life is not sacred. It is cheap, especially if you can ‘create’ it
in a test tube or petri dish.” They believe that the natural order of pro-creation
should be upheld and so methods of abortion and cloning disrupt the traditional
way of life.
This site targets many icons of popular media culture. Most publicly, the AFA has and continues to wage a war against the Walt Disney Company. The Walt Disney company is the most visible target of the AFA’s campaign against “immorality.” They claim that Disney, under the guise of “family entertainment,” is in reality not a family oriented company at all. According to the AFA, Disney is “…a leader in the advancement of a radical homosexual agenda, in the promotion of paganism, and anti-Christian entertainment.” The AFA is a proponent of a mass boycott of all of Disney’s products, including its movies, television shows, toys, theme parks, and all of its subsidiary companies. Other media personalities that the AFA opposes are Howard Stern and Marilyn Manson. They claim that Howard Stern “blasts audio pornography during peak morning hours,” which reaches and potentially influences impressionable children and adolescents. Marilyn Manson upsets the AFA for several reasons; his anti-Christian songs, his displays of overt sexuality, homo or hetero, and his nihilist attitude.
From a classical social constructionist point of view, the AFA firmly stands for the notion that one can change his or her sexual orientation. In an article found on the website entitled, “Homosexuals can change. I am living proof,” Michael Johnston recounts his experience as a “former homosexual” who, by the “grace of God,” was able to change his depraved ways. Johnston’s tale begins with him finding out that he is HIV positive, and his subsequent confrontation with God. He asserts that after this confrontation, God began to soften his heart and it became clear to him that his decision to be homosexual was the choice he had made that kept him in “emotional and spiritual bondage.” Through his relationship with God, he was “delivered” from his homosexual lifestyle and formed Kerusso ministries, which encourages people to reject their homosexual desires and embrace their “natural heterosexual identities.” Their notion of heterosexuality being “natural” is reflective of the order perspective; that being homosexual is devalued and seen as an aberration of the norm. Kerusso ministries are sponsors of national coming out of homosexuality day (NCOHD), which hopes to increase the visibility of individuals who have succeeded in shedding their homosexuality to live a “normal,” heterosexual life with God.
Another article featured on this website is “Gay rating idea draws ire
in Hollywood.” This article explores the possibilities of the addition
of an HC-homosexual content rating tag to the television rating system.
Proposed initially by the Christian Action Network, the AFA supports this
idea strongly. In a Christian Action Network press release, Martin
Mawyer states:
“TV broadcasters- - including network, cable, and satellite- already
place warning labels on programs containing violence, sex, and adult language.
Now it is time to warn parents about homosexual sex as well. Members
of our organization have become increasingly disgusted with the amount
of homosexuality in television programming. More than two dozen homosexual
characters are portrayed weekly on network television alone. Unless
these producers are trying to promote a secret agenda, they should have
no problems alerting parents that their programs contain homosexual content."
Thus, homosexuality is equated with negative social ideas- violence, sex, “adult language.” It is something that is fearful and that children need protection from. This is another illustration of the AFA’s social constructionist viewpoint that from exposure to the “depravity” of homosexuality, children will be coerced into either accepting that lifestyle, or even living it. In yet another article regarding the “safety of our children,” the video created by Helen Cohen and Debra Chasnoff called “It’s elementary: Talking about gay issues in school,” is reviewed and criticized. This video was created for school-age children, and it speaks on the issues of tolerance and respect of homosexuals. This has caused a great rift in the AFA, which feels that teaching about homosexuality in school is not only inappropriate, it also takes away the rights of the parents to teach their children their own morals at home. Taking a political stance, the AFA claims that showing the video strips parents of their rights to teach their children moral values at home. Although the video’s proponents assert that the video is useful even to parents with opposing views in the sense that it raises the topic of homosexuality to be discussed, the AFA feels that by educating children in school about the reality of homosexuality, the parent loses credibility to their child. In other words, children will have information from their teachers, who are authority figures to respect and look up to, and then, upon hearing opposing ideas from their parents, they will be confused and/or “manipulated” into thinking that homosexuality is normal and acceptable. In one part of the article, Thomas Price, a school principal, states “I don’t think that it’s appropriate that values only be taught at home. There are social values as well, there are community values.” According to the AFA, this translates into a blanket statement of the fact that “homosexuality is good.” They do not see the point that Price is attempting to make. He, as well as the makers of the video, are trying to assert the equality of people, not the “morality” of sexuality. In their attempts to promote tolerance, they are not presenting any value judgements on sexuality, they merely want to make children aware of different kinds of lifestyles in order to prevent bigotry. However, the AFA still displays the social contructionist view that sexuality can be influenced by learning about it.
The language used in this website is rather telling. When discussing homosexuality, words like weapon, war, and evil are used to convey their fight against it, as well as to describe homosexuality itself. They also use terms such as family, morals and values, to describe themselves and what they stand for. They want to preserve strong family values. They describe television as a weapon used by the liberal establishment to demoralize families. AFA uses terms that illustrate a Christian, conservative, all-American organization. Since the AFA wants to band together all of their like minded fellow Americans, they have also included in the website the AFA Action Alert, which is a way the AFA spreads the events in the media which attack the Christian Organizations. Subscribers are then suggested to respond politely with any objections. Visually, the name of the organization and the way it is presented on the webpage show “AFA.net” in bold letters with the background of the American flag. The American flag is used to represent the AFA’s commitment to the preservation of the American ideal- heterosexuality, family values, and Christian faith.
“Homosexual Activists Blame Christians for Hate Crime” is a memo that
was posted because homosexual activists were blaming Christians for hate
crime. Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay Task Force, have
blamed the death of Matthew Shepard on Christian ministries, especially
AFA, which recently sponsored newspaper ads offering ministry for homosexuals
who wanted to leave that lifestyle. Since there has been an increase
in the number of ads offering hope that homosexuals can change, pro-gay
organizations feel that this will lead to more hate crimes committed against
homosexuals. They also announce that they strongly oppose Reverend
Fred Phelps, whose hateful message includes slogans such as “God Hates
Fags,” and who picketed the funeral of Matthew Shepard. AFA executive
assistant Reverend Buddy Smith says, “the hateful tactics of Rev. Phelps
do not represent AFA’s Christian message. We believe God loves homosexuals
and offers them hope for forgiveness and healing.” In the article
“How Should We React?’, The author, David O’Leary, gives a reaction
to the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard. It claims that in 1963,
therapists knew the cause of homosexuality and they knew how to treat it.
Although they knew how to treat it, they did not actively “cure” the homosexuals.
As a result, there are more individuals out there that are ostracized by
society because of this condition. They claim that many young men
and their families came to the Church for help but were told not to worry.
Now, many parents are blaming the Church for not doing anything sooner
to prevent this condition from taking over their children. When asked,
why they didn’t act any sooner? They honestly admit that they really
didn’t care. The Church is publicly offering their apologies of their
wrongful actions for the last 35 years. They feel the need to repent for
failing to speak.
The principles that guide the AFA’s oppostion to the gay agenda again
reflect the order perspective of sexuality. They believe that it
is normal to be heterosexual, that sexuality is natural and unquestionable.
According to the AFA, being homosexual is against God’s design for mankind
as heterosexual beings. The AFA is very concerned with preserving
the “existing hierarchy,” that is, heterosexuality is the natural way to
live. With the dominant common sense belief that heterosexuality
is higher in the social hierarchy, they urge people not to go against God’s
plan by living a homosexual lifestyle. According to the AFA, being
homosexual means being a part of the lower strata of being; rejecting their
innate heterosexuality.
The AFA website links to many other websites which share similar views
as their organization. The AFA offers a link to the Christian Coalition
which strives to “…strengthen the family, protecting innocent human life,
and protecting young people from the pollution of pornography.” Also,
the Christian Family network is affiliated with AFA because of their focus
to advance “Christ-centered values, restore morality and protect life of
the individual, family, and community.” Due to their hopes to cure
anyone who suffers from any type of sexual addiction, the organization
offers a link to the Christian Alliance for Sexual Recovery. This
organization is dedicated to the Christian faith and to the recovery of
individuals who have been impacted by pornography and other sexual addictions.
They offer consultation, intensive workshops, and training institutes to
cure sexual disorders.
The AFA had indeed made its mark on society. They have succeeded in several of their efforts to “clean up” the media. For instance, they take credit for helping many morally questionable television shows lose their funding from advertisers, thus causing their eventual cancellation. One of the most publicized of these shows was ABC’s Ellen. They felt that Disney and ABC were irresponsible for allowing homosexual content to be shown on television. The possible influence of the program may have on their children, as well as the disgust they felt upon watching a socially sanctioned homosexual on television were the reasons why the AFA felt the need to take action to get the show off the air.
Using a sociological perspective, this website delves into the causal
determinants of the norms of society. The AFA asserts that the constant
display of immoral behavior by the media precipitates the downfall of society.
The website of the AFA also reveals the social constructionist argument;
since the AFA believes that the media is the cause of the decline in morals
in our modern society. According to the AFA, television has made
it seem acceptable to engage in depraved activities such as pre-marital
sex, homosexual sex, abortion, and adultery. In one of the articles
on the website, the media is referred to as a “social architect;” carefully
constructing the society’s immoral belief systems. The AFA’s arguments
seem somewhat paradoxical- how can sexuality be an innate quality and at
the same time be influenced by the media and societal acceptance of alternate
sexuality? It seems that they are not too clear themselves on how
to reconcile their conflicting thoughts on the social construction/essentialist
debate. On the one hand they believe that we are naturally heterosexual,
but on the other hand can change into a homosexual if they are not careful
about their exposure to homosexual rhetoric. The website itself also
reflects the AFA’s inability to decide what they believe in and to construct
a logical, non-contradictory train of thought upon which to base an association.
Perhaps they would benefit from taking a step back and rethinking their
stances as well as the theoretical bases upon which they are drawing
from. The most important thing that they seem to miss is that by
thinking that homosexuality is disgusting and wrong, they are indeed hating
the homosexual person, and hate is exactly what they claim to oppose.