March 21, 2002
Office of the President
Steven W. Fitschen
Dont give in to the propaganda! We must continue to defend
Dear Friend of the National Legal Foundation:
You probably saw or heard about Diane Sawyers
interview with Rosie ODonnell about the two Florida homosexuals who want to adopt a ten-year-old
Im sure you realized that it was an incredibly
powerful propaganda piece.
This show used the old liberal trick of appearing to be
even-handed while actually stacking the deck. Thats why I need to know that I can
count on you to help us stay in this fight for the future of Americas children. I
hope that after I tell you about this incredible propaganda warand what the National
Legal Foundation intends to do about itthat you will send your very best gift
to help us in this cause.
Let me mention a few ways in which they stacked the deck.
First, they appeared to present both sides . . . but did they? Compare who spoke in favor
of homosexual adoption with who spoke against it:
The two homosexuals who want to adopt
The five children in their household
A social scientist
Several adoption experts
Two more homosexuals who have already adopted
Seven children who have been adopted into homosexual households
One Florida legislator
Is that even-handed? NO! Not at more than nineteen
Plus, Diane Sawyer often appeared to ask tough questions of
the pro-homosexual adoption side. BUT she always let them explain away anything that was
bad for them. She never gave the pro-family side the same opportunity.
For example, when Diane mentioned scientific studies that
indicate real harm to children from homosexual "families," she allowed her
pro-homosexual guests to make personal attacks on the scientists involved in those
On the other hand, when a study looked bad for homosexual
adoption, she allowed the same guest to twist the results into looking good for
homosexual adoption. This same guest later said that all the studies point in the same
But perhaps the most "clever" trick was to discuss
the issue in such an emotionally appealing manner that those whose minds were not
well-made-up ahead of time would be inclined to side with the homosexuals.
There was nothing designed to emotionally attract anyone to
the Biblical position on this issue. In fact, even though the program was trying to appear
balanced, several attacks were made on the Biblical position. It was called
"hate-filled rhetoric," "bias," "closed-minded," and
"wrong." They are talking about you and me!
Everything was designed to generate sympathy for the two
homosexuals. After all, they have cared for some very sick children. Of course, it
didnt matter if lies had to be told to generate this sympathy: At one point,
Diane said to one of the homosexuals, isnt Florida saying to you that
"Youre good enough to take care of him when he was sick, bit youre not
good enough to take care of him if hes well." To which the homosexual replied,
"Thats what the law says." Well, guess what. There is no such law!
Even the name of the program stacked the deck. It was called
"Rosies Story: For the Sake of the Children."
I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Now let me tell
you what they could have done.
Because of our expertise on the legal side of this issue,
Dianes assistant contacted us before this program aired.
We had a good talk. During our conversation and follow-up
correspondence, I informed her of the following matters and made the following offers:
- I explained the Biblical position on this issue.
- I told her of our various legal activities on this issue . .
. that is, all the cases and briefs that you have helped us with through your
prayers and financial support.
- I offered to be interviewed for the program.
- I offered to give her the names of other qualified folks on
our side of the issue that they could interview.
- I informed her of a study by two University of Chicago Ph.D.s
that repudiates ALL of the homosexual parenting studies.
Did she take me up on any of this? NO!
- While Diane did allow the Florida legislator to discuss the
Biblical perspective, she did not use anything that I told her . . . and I have reason to
believe that other Christian organizations were contacted and that their views were
ignored as well.
- Diane did ask a couple of softball questions to Rosie about
things that "they" say in legal briefs. The questions were so vague I
couldnt even tell if she was talking about our briefs or someone elses. (But
lets hope that you and I had at least that much influence.)
- They did not interview me for the program.
- They did not interview anyone I recommended. In fact, they
couldnt have . . . because they never even asked for the recommendations.
- They never mentioned the study by the University of Chicago
Ph.D.s. This was especially outrageous sinceas I mentioned aboveone of their
guests claimed that all of the studies point in favor of homosexual adoption. BUT the
study I referred them to refuted every one of the studies she referred to.
Given the "sneaky" appearance of impartiality of
the program, it is amazing that Diane or anyone else was willing to admit anything
negative about homosexual adoption. But when you listened very carefully, you heard the
guests admit a lot of negatives about homosexuals as parents.
Of course, they tried to explain it all away. BUT the
explanations dont hold up. So . . . lets see what the advocates of homosexual
adoption themselves are willing to admit:
- Both Rosie and the two homosexuals admitted that in an
"ideal world" it would be better for children to be adopted by a mother
- Diane admitted that there are published studies on
homosexuals molesting the children in their households.
- The "expert" admitted that homosexual household
have higher rates of domestic violence.
- She admitted that homosexuals have higher rates of drug
- She admitted that homosexuals have higher rates of sexual
- She admitted that at least one study showed that children
raised in homosexual households have much higher rates of experimentation with
When the pro-homosexual forces are willing to admit all of
this, why should we have any hesitation to stand firm on this issue? Plus, the Bible
teaching is clear!
I wrote this letter to help you understand how important
your support has been over the years . . . and how vitally important it is right now and
into the foreseeable future.
As this letter demonstrates, the media is stacked against
us. High profile celebrities like Rosie have incredible influence. WEwith Gods
helpmust hold the line.
And one place that the National Legal Foundation has held
the line is in Americas courtrooms. Let me remind you of just some of the cases that
our faithful friends like you have helped us with:
- At the Tennessee Supreme Court, we protected the right
of a mother who had left the lesbian lifestyle to prevent unwanted visitation by her
- At the Ohio Supreme Court, we argued that a lesbian
cohabiting with another lesbian mother should not be declared the childs parent.
appellate court, we argued that a custody
order that prohibited overnight visitation if a lesbian mother had overnight
"visitors" included that mothers lesbian lover . . . even if the lesbians
had gotten a "civil union" from Vermont.
- In a Florida appellate court, we argued that judges in
that state have the right to take a parents homosexuality into account in making
- On a more general levelbut one that absolutely impacts
our childrenwe have filed briefs with the Hawaii and Vermont Supreme Courts,
arguing that same-sex marriage must not be allowed. (And on the legislative front, we have
worked in nearly 35 states on legislation protecting marriage.)
Currently, we are monitoring situations in Georgia and
Massachusetts . . . as well as the Florida adoption case that Rosie is so upset about. As
the Lord leads and as our friends like you provide the finances, we will fight these
And in the future, we will continue to prayerfully consider
involvement in every single homosexual adoption and custody case that comes to our
attention. All we need is your support! Thats why I need you to send your
very best gift today.
Rosie claims that she does what she does for the sake of the
children. Maybe she really believes that. BUT in light of both what the Bible teaches and
what the homosexuals themselves admit about homosexual households, it is really you and I
who are trying to protect children.
And for that reason, I have no qualms about signing this
letter . . .
For the Children,
Steven W. Fitschen
P.S. We are quickly losing ground on this issue in the
"court of public opinion." Of course, that doesnt change Gods
eternal truth on this subject. But it can make our work more difficult. Now is the
time to engage the battle. The homosexuals have thrown down the gauntlet. It is not
overblown rhetoric to say that Americas children are at risk. We must act NOW.
Please let me hear from you today!