Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Recently, homosexual extremists flooded David Parker's blog with their typical stream of nonsense and silly questions. They disputed the idea that the picture book (given without his knowledge to his kindergarten child) had anything to do with sex, and therefore is not covered by the Massachusetts Parental Notification law. The book, Who's In A Family, clearly gives the message that lesbian and "gay" couple parents are on a natural and moral par with traditional families.
MassResistance is not afraid to answer their silly questions. But how sad that it's necessary to state the obvious, and articulate what was once just common sense! (Note: Mr. MassResistance speaks only for himself, and no one else.)
Silly homosexual extremist question #1: You continue to duck and dodge the real issue behind the "cartoon picture book." What do pictures, stories, anecdotes, or any other representation of the makeup of an individual child's family have to do with sex and sexuality? And if two moms and their daughter washing the family dog IS about sex, then why isn't two heterosexual parents and their child sitting down to a meatloaf dinner about sex?
Silly homosexual extremist question #2: Many of us in the great anonymous Massachusetts wilderness have been waiting since April to hear David Parker explain, in his own words, just EXACTLY what "Who's in a Family" has to do with sex and sexuality. Because, the laws of the Commonwealth succinctly state that a parent may opt his/her child out of any classroom lesson or discussion dealing with sex and sexuality. Unless you can illucidate [sic] the "sexual" content of "What's [sic] in a Family" or any of the books in your child's kindergarten classroom (or freely available in the school library, for that matter), then you are asking to EXPAND and/or rewrite the established definition of parental notification.
The basic problem here is that perverted sexual relationships are being forcefully injected into the daily lives of normal people. To say that the existing Parental Notification law in Massachusetts doesn't cover this possibility is like saying that John Adams should have spelled out (in the Massachusetts constitution) that sodomy was not a valid basis for marriage; or that since the Bible doesn't expressly mention credit card fraud, it's not stealing.
The attempted normalization of homosexual, lesbian, transsexual, bisexual, questioning, or polyamorous "marital" arrangements has changed everything. Where once we would have said that a pre-school picture book with scenes of families (with a mommy and a daddy) going about their daily activities was NOT about sex, once a two-daddy family is included, it IS about sex -- even for the traditional families portrayed.
The homosexual extremists have politicized and sexualized everything they come near. And they have destroyed the innocence of early childhood.
From the time a child comes into the world, he observes his parents (one male, one female) interact. Sometimes they hug or kiss. And yes, he registers the fact that they sleep in the same bed. And sometimes the bedroom door is locked and he hears noises. This is a child's normal introduction to sex. It is simply put before him in the context of normal, healthy family activities. Pictures of a normal two-parent family in a picture book do convey a message to the child: This is a family.
Usually, a child's introduction to this normal context of sex and sexuality is unremarkable and would not fall under the Massachusetts Parental Notification law. This is because such normal story books (or family photos) do not present the child with any jarring, startling, or unnatural concepts. His thoughts and imaginings will not proceed into the parents' bedroom at the age of 5 or 6 upon seeing a traditional family picture.
But the minute you present him with an abnormal, unusual, bizarre arrangement, which he knows instinctively in his gut is not right, is odd, off-kilter, or unnatural -- this will provoke a sense of uneasiness followed by new and strange imaginings. He'll ask (openly or privately), "Why does my classmate have two mommies? I thought a mommy needed a daddy to have a baby?"
If a young child is presented with a novel, unusual image of a family, with two mommies or two daddies (or three daddies?), the child will naturally next wonder if they kiss and hug and share a bed. How do they make babies? It's the perversion of normal relations that brings in SEX on a level beyond that a kindergartner should be dealing with. Then, it becomes a lesson on SEX at a level covered by state law protecting parental rights.
(Of course there's another question that we are not dealing with now: Does a school have the right to undermine parents' religious and moral beliefs they are trying to teach their child?)
We come back to the fact that heterosexual parenting is normal -- and the child absorbs the inherent sex lesson slowly, by osmosis. But abnormal homosexual couplings are forcing the child to imagine questions about sexual activities that would otherwise come at a much older age. It's homosexual perversion being forcefully pushed into our faces that's causing a problem.
The Parker case is about "coercive indoctrination" of vulnerable, very young children. The homosexual activists know how powerful images are in their brainwashing campaign. That's why they're putting this book into little children's hands without parental knowledge.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
BAGLY is announcing a pre-screening of the show on Sept. 7. This organization is supposedly helping our troubled teens steer clear of suicidal thoughts (for which it receives Massachusetts tax dollars!). How will pushing this perversion help them? The flyer for the series states:
This eight-part program charts one year in the lives of four college students undergoing gender transition.
Gabbie, Lucas, Raci and T. J. are confronting the challenges of school, campus life, family ... and changing their sex. TransGeneration joins them at four different schools across America as the quartet -- two transitioning from female to male and two transitioning from male to female -- define who they are and take control of their gender identity.
It seems that new recruits are needed in the sex-changed population. There aren't enough people who understand the diagram handed out to Massachusetts public school children at GLSEN's conference last April. Children who attend BAGLY's trans workshops hear about how Grace (BAGLY Executive Director), as a "trans male-to-female", discusses "her" sexuality with the men "she" has sex with. Gems from a trans discussion at the GLSEN conference:
Our language breaks down… What do you call a trans-man attracted to a woman? [and other combinations] This culture is not set up for trans people. Grace Stowell said she tells men right up front, "I'm a transgender woman." Most of the men she's been with were either gay men or bisexual men.
What if a son says, "Mom, Dad, I'm bringing home a man." vs. "Mom, Dad, I'm bringing home a trans man."?
Male-to-female participant said before she started going through the change, she was not perceived as a gay man. People would address him/her as a lady, even though she (?) still had facial hair…people "must have thought I was a butch femme."
Panelist Michelle: Since she's pre-op, she still has "...titties and a penis, so it's just more to play with."
Panelist Mike: Likes "bears" and his current friend is a bear. [Some of the audience members murmured in reaction to this. …A bear, or sometimes "teddy bear," is a slang term for a big, fat, hairy man.]
Lesbian female attendee said how she used to date another lesbian female, but that lesbian female transitioned to a male. However, she doesn't now consider herself to be straight; she claimed she is still a dyke. Panelist Mike affirmed this phenomenon, stating that "there are a lot of lesbian couples where one transitions."
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Saturday, August 20, 2005
The Boston Globe reports that Weld now claims his support for homosexual "marriage" extends only to the Massachusetts borders. But then how can it be a "civil right"? Is there a different definition of "civil rights" in New York than in Boston?
Bill Weld is responsible for letting GLSEN get a foothold in the public schools of Massachusetts to pollute our children with its pro-homosexual propaganda. (Then GLSEN built on its Massachusetts model to infiltrate schools across America.) Thanks to Weld, the "Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth" will be hard to dismantle.
Has the press forgotten that Weld officiated at the "marriage" of his Harvard roommate to another man, just one year ago? Does Weld believe his friend Mitchell Adams is "married" while in Massachusetts, but "unmarried" while residing at his elegant Maine vacation home?
On June 22, 2004, 365Gay.com reported:
While current Republican Governor Mitt Romney was in Washington telling a Senate hearing that if Congress doesn't pass a constitutional amendment gay marriage will "spread like wildfire" across the nation, former Massachusetts GOP Governor William F. Weld was officiating at the gay marriage of his old college roommate.
Mitchell Adams, Weld's closest friend at university and a former Mass. revenue commissioner, married Weld's former chief of staff Kevin Smith. The former governor read the homily at the ceremony at King's Chapel.
The marriage was the first same-sex ceremony Weld has attended. "I was terrified when I saw I'd been assigned the homily. I didn't know what a homily was so I just told war stories about Mitchell and Kevin," he said.
Weld told reporters that he's opposed to any constitutional amendment barring gay marriage. He said that if he were not at the wedding he would have been in Washington opposing Romney.
Friday, August 19, 2005
This is "Gay Pride"?
Maybe in 1997 we could have said this was sad. Now we are supposed to say it's perfectly healthy and normal?
As a "lawmaker", he should realize that since the Legislature has failed to act on this issue of "marriage" (as required by the state constitution), homosexual "marriages" are without statutory basis so are still not legal. Yet he says he doesn't want to take away "something that they cherish". But where do "rights" come from -- the Supreme Judicial Court, or God? We may write constitutions to protect rights, but no human institution creates rights.
Would Rep. Petruccelli please define "marriage" and its role in society, and not just think about it on an emotional level?
From Bay Windows (August 18, 2005):
While he says he has always believed that same-sex couples should be treated equally to heterosexual couples, Petruccelli said his vote for the so-called compromise amendment resulted in part from his belief that the convention was destined to pass some version of an amendment and that supporting the least drastic of those was the right thing to do. What led him to change his mind, ultimately, was the reality that as of May 17, 2004, same-sex couples in Massachusetts entered into legal marriages and it would be wrong to now roll back their rights.
"I think that has changed things dramatically," said Petruccelli. "And it makes it easy for me to look at this issue and say, who am I to take away something from someone that they cherish, that they already have? I think that is probably the strongest aspect of why I feel strongly about voting no in the [next] convention." Petrucelli noted that he and his wife will celebrate their three-year anniversary in September and while their lives have not changed since May 17, 2004, it has impacted the lives of same-sex couples positively. "Its made stronger unions among people who have not had the opportunity up until that time to get married," he observes. Civil unions, he has concluded, would obviously be "a major step backwards in equality." The lawmaker also said he is opposed to the initiative petition drive recently launched by same-sex marriage opponents to put a marriage ban on the 2008 ballot.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
"Last year, the Provincetown Chief of Police alerted many of the homosexual activist organizations ahead of time [of his group's visit] and they met the 100+ [Stephen Bennett Ministries] evangelists with protests, signs, yelling and more. An extremist fringe of homosexual activists who knew SBM was coming (mostly angry lesbians) took over 200 Bibles from the evangelists (saying they wanted one) and then threw them in garbage cans all over town. SBM recovered these Bibles out of the garbage cans."
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
See "The Danger of the Ideological State" by Paul M. Weyrich (from Agape Press, August 15, 2005).
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Ex-gays simply spread the word that God's truth can provide the way out of an unhappy homosexual "lifestyle". But the homosexual extremists are twisting the ex-gay message, portraying it as an attack on their freedom, health, and safety.
Queertoday's phrase reminded us of another phrase in vogue with their movement, "spiritual violence", which they apply to the traditional Judeo-Christian understanding of Biblical teachings on homosexuality.
Any religious value or belief which interferes with homosexuals' value-free, hedonistic "lifestyle" is now branded in this way. The implication of these two phrases is clear: that those defending traditional values are aggressive, criminal perpetrators of violence. Does this include your church?
Contrast the homosexual extremists' phony use of "religion" with genuine expressions of their attitude towards religion. Look at their "carnival" in Provincetown. (And note how the Boston Herald reports on the carnival line-up straightforwardly, as if this event were totally mainstream!)
Just a few events from the P'town carnival: There's a drag queen bingo night at the Unitarian-Universalist "church". And the UU's hosting a "performance artist" whose "impersonations of the political enemies of the left are spectacularly blasphemous and depraved. Adult content is definitely included. Watch her bear witness, but hold on to your faith because Starlite is bringing the apocalypse closer with every show!"
So ... if your church doesn't host such events, but instead teaches that homosexuality is contrary to God's law, is it guilty of "religious terrorism"?
And if you are taken aback by the message of a drag queen performance (see below), are you guilty of "spiritual violence"? How could you possibly object to "her" invitation to join "her" on a "frolicsome path towards hell and damnation"?
From the Provincetown Banner: "Varla Jean Merman is a queen among queens!
"A big red apple poses no threat to this lady eve. Nor does a snake enthrall her for any longer than a costume change. Varla Jean Merman has committed her fair share of transgressions in her time and in her new show, "I'm Not Paying for This!", she takes the audience with her on a frolicsome path towards hell and damnation....
Varla still has time to declare that she refuses to pay for that dull package of judgments that nameless others are so fond of doling out. Oh no, Varla can make her own world somewhere over the rainbow and it is everybody else that is going to want to pay to see her seriously masterful presentation of an innocent romp through the seven deadly sins."
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
WHAT'S LOVE got to do with it?
Bill Dalrymple, 56, and best friend Bryan Pinn, 65, have decided to take the plunge and try out the new same-sex marriage legislation with a twist -- they're straight men.
"I think it's a hoot," Pinn said.
The proposal came last Monday on the patio of a Toronto bar amid shock and laughter from their friends. But the two -- both of whom were previously married and both of whom are still looking for a good woman to love -- insist that after the humour subsided, a real issue lies at the heart of it all.
"There are significant tax implications that we don't think the government has thought through," Pinn said. Dalrymple has been to see a lawyer already and there are no laws in marriage that define sexual preference....
They want to shed light on the widespread financial implications of the new legislation and are willing to take it all the way.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Militant leftist professors have gone beyond hating America. Now, militant "gay" professors not only harass conservative students for their political views, but also get away with sexual and religious harassment as well. Excerpts:
“My name is Michael Vocino and I like d--k.”
These were the words spoken by my philosophy professor, Michael Vocino, as he introduced himself to our class the first day of his Political Philosophy course....
During the semester that followed, Professor Vocino made numerous sexual comments and gestures towards myself and other male members of the class. On the second day of class, Professor Vocino asked me, in front of the class, whether I was uncomfortable knowing that he thought that I was “hot.” I answered in the affirmative. Further along in the semester, as I entered the class with my shorts on, Professor Vocino noted that I had nice legs. To that, I responded that though they may be nice, they were unfortunately hairy.
A few times during the semester instead of giving the usual educational assignments, Professor Vocino asked me, and a few other male members, to try “making out” with other males and tell the class how it felt. While observing an outside student walk by the classroom with baggy-style jeans on, he offered that he wished men would wear tighter pants because he liked “bums.” Often Professor Vocino would ask members of the class for hugs. In fact, he did an “experiment” to see how people reacted to the intrusion on their personal space. This “experiment” consisted of class members standing as close as they could to each other. He ended the “experiment” with students, again mostly male and including myself, standing as close to him as they felt comfortable.
During the semester, Professor Vocino spent much time on the subject of sex, or in his words, “f---ing”, often asking students if they were sexually active; if so, how much, with who and when. It was a frequent occurrence for Professor Vocino to talk about “d--k” and all of the actions that one can do with said body member. It should be noted that one entire class was devoted to the topic of masturbation....
The most frequent criticism of my Christian belief was its position against homosexuality. At the time of the course, the debate over same-sex marriage was receiving much national attention, particularly in neighboring Massachusetts. As the designated Christian and conservative spokesperson in the class (and not always wanting the task), I was required to defend these positions. At one point, after finishing my explanation, Professor Vocino responded contemptuously, “What the f--k does it matter?”
As the semester progressed, I began to feel hated within the classroom. I found myself wanting to avoid class because I did not want to be attacked. I wondered about all the campus regulations which emphasized “diversity” and “sensitivity” to and respect for the Other. I wondered why these regulations didn’t apply to people’s hateful attitudes towards me.
The fear I experienced was intensified by Professor Vocino’s own attitudes towards me. He would often deliberately mischaracterize Christian beliefs in order to provoke me to respond. One such occurrence was when Professor Vocino asked me why I and other Christians “hate fags.” It took a lot of effort to explain why it is incorrect to state that Christians “hate fags.” My difficulty stemmed in part that I was a student and he was my professor. I was conscious of my lack of knowledge and experience, compared to his level of expertise in Biblical history and text. The fact that the accusations he was making were harsh and extreme increased my discomfort....
The student went to URI's Discrimination/Affirmative Action office and was told there was nothing that the office could do about the professor's behavior. Apparently, Professor Vocino is still teaching Machiavelli in this same manner.
Saturday, August 06, 2005
In New Jersey, Herb wanted to become Kerri. So, the male middle-school teacher in New Jersey is returning to his school in the fall following "gender reassignment surgery." He thinks he is now a woman, and everyone else is expected to think that too. Including middle-school age children.
Let's get real. "Sexual identity" and "gender expression" are never going to be something only adults deal with. There's no way of avoiding young children's involvement. Do we really want them to ponder penile inversion surgery? Many of us have confronted staff in stores or restaurants who are either cross-dressing or surgically altered people. It's a very unnatural and disturbing thing, if for adults then obviously much more so for children.
How can we comprehend all this talk and acceptance of such bodily mutilation? Why is it that there's common horror when breast cancer necessitates breast removal, yet we let BAGLY tell our girls it's something they might want to consider for the sake of their "gender expression"? (Should we start telling women suffering from breast cancer that it's no big deal?)
What difference does it make if a woman has breasts or not? What difference does it make whether a man has a penis or not? Of course, Herb thought he was a "woman", not a "man". And a lot of people encouraged him in that thinking. So he gets a little silicone here, a little tissue removal and carving out there. And we tell our children everything's fine, and they shouldn't be upset or sickened.
No, we won't go there. People like Herb (and his supporters) need serious help, and it's not surgical.
From the New Jersey Star-Ledger, 8-2-05:
"She was a good teacher as a man," said Marisa Dodge, a fellow teacher at Mountain View and co-president of the local teacher's union. "She will be a good teacher as a woman."
The district could not fire her based on her gender, given that state anti-discrimination laws apply to transgender people, said Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey.
State advocacy groups said McCaffrey will become New Jersey's first openly transgender teacher in several decades. The first was Paul Monroe Grossman, a Bernards Township transgender high school teacher who had a sex change in 1971.
"I can't imagine a more courageous role model for students than a member of the transgender community," said Steven Goldstein, chairperson of Garden State Equality, a group that supports gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights. "I have no doubt (McCaffrey) will be a statewide or possibly a nationwide figure."
Friday, August 05, 2005
"It is remarkable that activists on behalf of gay and lesbian acceptance always include the transgendered. What, after all, do the transgendered, who are usually heterosexual men, have to do with gays and lesbians?
"The answer is that activists understand that their primary goal -- equating same-sex sexual behavior with man-woman sex -- can only be accomplished if other Judeo-Christian and Western sexual norms are also rejected.
"That is why the very word 'sex,' when referring to male or female, has been changed to 'gender.' And society at large has accepted this linguistic change as if it were insignificant. The change on application forms, for example, from 'Sex: M or F' to 'Gender: M or F' has gone unnoticed. But it is a huge change. In the sexual activists' world, 'sex' is fixed and objective; 'gender' is fluid and subjective....
"One of the major values of the Old Testament, the primary source of Judeo-Christian values, is the notion of a divinely ordained order based on separation. What God has created distinct, man shall not tamper with.
"As examples, good is separate from evil (attempts to blur their differences are known as moral relativism and are anathema to Judeo-Christian values); life is separate from death (in part a reaction to ancient Egypt, which blurred the distinction between life and death); God is separate from nature (see part XVI); humans are separate from animals (see part XV); and man is separate from woman. Blurring any of these distinctions is tampering with the order of the world as created by God and leads to chaos. So important is the notion of separation that the very word for 'holy' in biblical Hebrew (kadosh) means 'separate,' 'distinct.' "...
If a man gets a sexual thrill out of wearing women's undergarments in the privacy of his bedroom, that is not society's concern. It may be his religion's concern, and, religious or not, it may be his female partner's concern (one wonders how many women married to cross dressing men are pleased by the sight of their man in a bra and panties). But it is not society's concern...
However, when a man does this in public, he has publicly blurred the man-woman distinction, and society has the right -- and the duty, if it cares about Judeo-Christian values or simply cares about not confusing children as to sexual identity -- to say this violates a norm that society does not wish violated.
The war waged by cultural radicals at universities, in state legislatures and in courtrooms against the very distinction between male and female is one of their most significant attempts to undo the Judeo-Christian foundations of American and Western culture. And they know it. That's why fighting to blur gender distinctions is so important to them.
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Perhaps if you politely address them, they'll answer you. Let me know if you hear back from them.
MassResistanceWatch may be reached at: email@example.com
MassMarrier may be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Look at what you're funding. Is this suicide prevention? Or are you driving young people into lives of misery? Why are you leading our children into the sad and twisted world of transgenderism and transsexuality?
See the new postings on Article 8 Alliance:
From the GLSEN Workshop at Brookline High School, homosexuality conference, April 30 . . . Graphic talk on transsexuality / transgenderism given to children by homosexual activists! Hard-core "trans" activists tell kids "the facts of life". Remember the override of the Governor's veto? Here's where the money goes.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
The "Guide to Intersex & Trans Terminologies" by Emi Koyama of the Survivor Project. "Miss" ("Ms"?) Koyama not only authored this glossary. [S]he also is a speaker for the Survivor Project. Her bio reads:
Since her birth in 1975, Emi Koyama has lived twelve years of her life as a boy, twelve years as a girl, and has been trying to get over it all since her 24th birthday. She nonetheless navigates most of her daily activities as a third wavin' chick activist/academic, synthesizing her feminist, Asian, survivor, lesbian, queer, sex worker, intersex, trans, and crip politics, as these factors, while not a complete descriptor of who she is, all impacted her life. She joined Survivor Project in 1999, and since then updated much of how the organization presented about intersex people. In addition, she volunteers for Danzine, an advocacy organization by and for sex workers.
Remember that one of the demands of the radical homosexuals is de-criminalizing prostitution. (See the Gay Rights Platform 1972, State #3.) They also demand repeal of all state laws prohibiting transvestism and cross-dressing (State #6). GLSEN is obviously on board with this, and must want our young children to start thinking about careers as sex workers (maybe even as transgendered/transsexual sex workers). Note that the children are next linked through Survivor Project to Danzine, an online "zine" for prostitutes.