Saturday, September 29, 2007
As of today, NO Massachusetts sponsors had signed up, even though the sponsor book says: "You will all have a huge cloud of witnesses when you stand up and vigil for justice." Where are all the "straight allies across the nation demand[ing] equality for LGBT Americans"? We think it's time for the KnowThyNeighbor guys to take a rest.
Apparently, Mr. Toleos, the Action Leader, will be perfectly happy if his little children grow up L, G, B or T. His son catching AIDS from anal sex? No problem. His daughter removing her breasts and growing a beard? No problem. No grandchildren? No problem.
From the 7 Straight Nights web site:
The Toleos FamilyStatement:
I will not stand by while gay individuals, couples, and their children are dehumanized and denied basic rights. I will not stand by while children are deprived of basic protections and benefits because of their parents' sexual orientation. I will not stand by while gay Americans die for their country while forced to keep their true identities hidden. I challenge you to join my family in making a public stand in support of our gay friends and neighbors by fighting for equality, justice, and freedom for ALL Americans. The gay community has been coming out of the closet for years. Now it is our turn to come out with our support for them.--Aaron Toleos
Judy Shepard, mother of Matthew Shepard, is pushing the "Seven Straight Nights" effort:
"As a straight ally and mother of a hate crime victim, I challenge all of us to action. With your help, Seven Straight Nights can have a lasting impact on our communities by starting critical conversations, creating meaningful relationships, and affirming a group of people that have faced hate and bigotry for far too long."
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Mary Breslauer [left], principal at Communications Solutions, co-host of HRC’s XM radio show “The Agenda”; former co-chair, Kerry-Edwards 2004 LGBT Steering Committee.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
"BIGOT" -- A person who is religiously attached to a particular computer, language, operating system, editor, or other tool (see religious issues). Usually found with a specifier; thus, "Cray bigot", "ITS bigot", "APL bigot", "VMS bigot", "Berkeley bigot". Real bigots can be distinguished from mere partisans or zealots by the fact that they refuse to learn alternatives even when the march of time and/or technology is threatening to obsolete the favoured tool. It is truly said "You can tell a bigot, but you can't tell him much." Compare weenie. [Compare spod, computer geek, terminal junkie. The Jargon File]
-- The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2007 Denis Howe
And after reading this, and knowing Brian of MassResistance, we though maybe there might be something to it. Brian is quite set in his high-tech habits.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Seems that homosexual "marriages" have tapered off lately. We've reported on this in the past. Recently we read of the same phonemenon in Canada. (See "Only 1 Canadian same-sex couple 'married' in Toronto this year," LifeSiteNews.) Hmm...
They don't really want marriage. They just want to destroy the institution of marriage. Stanley Kurtz was right: According to American author/researcher Stanley Kurtz, the goal of the homosexual movement is not about “marriage” for gays, but the ultimate demolition of all marriage. Basing his idea upon a 2001 Law Commission called “Beyond Conjugality”, Kurtz declared, “The way to abolish marriage, without seeming to abolish it, is to redefine the institution out of existence. If everything can be marriage, pretty soon nothing will be marriage.”
Sunday, September 23, 2007
and on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk
Seems he died at the age of 47 in his Brookline apartment of undisclosed causes in July 2005.
Another propaganda master we've been wondering about is the genius behind the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth," David LaFontaine. He sort of dropped off the map. Anyone know where David is today? You know where to email us.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
2002 Romney flier promotes 'gay' rights; Candidate reportedly handed out leaflet at Boston 'Pride' parade (9-21-07)
A website paid for and authorized by the Massachusetts Democratic Party has posted a picture of a flier reportedly passed out at a 2002 'gay pride' event by then-gubernatorial candidate Mitt Romney expressing support for homosexual rights.
The flier, on red paper, claims to have been paid for by "the Romney for Governor Committee and the Kerry Murphy Healey Committee" and reads, "Mitt and Kerry wish you a great Pride Weekend. All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of sexual preference." ...
As WND reported, Romney's claims he did everything possible "within the law" to throttle homosexual marriage after the Massachusetts Supreme Court issued an opinion saying denial of marriage to same-sex couples violated the state constitution have been refuted by several constitutional experts who say that just isn't so.
See some of WND's earlier stories (using research by MassResistance, John Haskins, and Attorney "Robert Paine") on Romney's role in promoting "homosexual rights" and unconstitutionally implementing homosexual "marriages":
Romney's 'constitutional bungling' criticized; Leaders say he ordered 'homosexual marriage' even though court never asked him to (7-12-07) -- Discusses National Review's biased coverage of Romney, and avoidance of this important Constitutional issue.
Experts: Credit Romney for homosexual marriage; 'What he did was exercise illegal legislative authority' (7-14-07) -- Includes quotes from law professors Herb Titus and Scott FitzGibbon, and analyses by Chris Stovall, senior general counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund; attorney Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum; and Hadley Arkes, a professor of jurisprudence at Amherst, who wrote about the situation in National Review shortly after the implementation of the law.
" 'Conservative' Romney buckles and blunders" (12-24-05) by John Haskins -- Yes, way back in 2005 we were trying to inform the country!
Friday, September 21, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
InNews Weekly also breathlessly reported on the MCC's new "Justice School Sunday" program for children, to be run by a young 20-something "queer libertarian." He said that the "Boston Alliance for GLBT Youth (BAGLY) holds its Wednesday meetings in our [MCC] space; we welcomed the first Boston Transgender Pride celebration in 2006; and we have a long history of ministers supporting GLBT rights."
[9-13-07] MCC Boston has also worked to address issues that specifically impact the community.“MCC has been focusing a lot on crystal meth addiction, which is very much part of the gay community right now, and other denominations aren’t going to focus on those issues,” said Cooper.While MCC Boston had about 120 members at its peak, over the years the congregation has shrunk down to about 35. Cooper said the AIDS crisis took a major toll on the church, claiming the lives not only of many of its members but of several of its clergy and lay leaders.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
One thing is for sure: the male "bisexual" fad is helping to spread HIV/AIDS to females. "Men who have sex with men" . . . and also with women. "Attendees will have the opportunity to socialize and learn about health issues facing the bisexual community."
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
It's one thing for a judge to spout nonsense; it's another for a foolish Governor to take up her suggestion. Romney violated the Massachusetts Constitution in issuing new marriage licenses without any change in our marriage statute. And he had no authority to order JPs and Town Clerks to implement these illegal "marriages". Why did he do it? Was he keeping his promise to the radical Log Cabin "Republicans"?
Sunday, September 16, 2007
It's telling that four Republican candidates have now declined to take part in that event: Romney, Giuliani, McCain, and Thompson. (And all the Democrat candidates refused a Values Voter debate.) Clearly they don't want to have to answer pointed questions on abortion, homosexual "marriage", illegal immigration, etc.
Romney has the gall to set his "first town meeting on the Web" at exactly the same time as the Values Voter debate. We'll be watching the latter, streamed live on http://www.valuesvoterdebate.com/ and http://www.afa.net/.
From the Boston Globe (9-16-07):
Romney plans his first town meeting on Web
Mitt Romney, already one of the more eager presidential candidates when it comes to working the Web, plans his first online-only town meeting tomorrow. It will be held live at 7:30 p.m. via streaming video, giving people anywhere in the country a chance to ask Romney about issues and priorities. Web surfers will have to register by 7:15 p.m. to take part, the Romney campaign said. Tomorrow is also the deadline to submit entries in a TV ad contest that Romney touts as the first time an amateur-produced spot will air on behalf of a presidential candidate.
For those who choose to tune into the Romney web meeting, here's where you can submit your questions: http://www.visualwebcaster.com/Romney/42280/reg.html And we suggest you ask:
- Why did you order Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks to implement homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts, when the Constitution and current statutes don't allow it? Since the Court (without authority!) told only the Legislature to change the statutes, why did you step in? Weren't you violating the Constitution with your order?
- Do you, or do you not, believe homosexuality is immoral? How does your belief impact your public policy positions on homosexuality? Homosexual "marriage"? Adoption of children by homosexual couples?
Saturday, September 15, 2007
We at MassResistance (then Article 8 Alliance) led that effort. See "It's Crunch Time in Boston" by John Haskins, WorldNetDaily (4-11-05):
Though their oaths of office compel them to declare the ruling null and void and to remove the four judges, the executive and legislative branches in this "separate but equal" farce clearly believe that their oaths, too, have been struck down. Gov. Mitt Romney – Republican and practicing Mormon – while posing in the Bible Belt as a pro-family conservative, has taken to sponsoring homosexual youth parades in Boston. Chief Justice Margaret Marshall is now running the state, when she's not fund-raising for homosexual organizations and otherwise mocking rules about judicial neutrality. Feeling powerless as governor, Romney is wondering if he can be our next president....
Gov. Romney and the Legislature need to be made the laughingstock of the nation for not standing up to the self-appointed politburo that has reduced them to mindless puppets. We need all the help we can get here because removing judges is now a do-or-die effort for constitutional self-government, and not only for Massachusetts. For the entire country, a great deal depends on our scaring the Massachusetts political establishment back into at least faintly constitutional parameters. If we fail to remove the four outlaw justices, Americans may well look back at the Massachusetts homosexual marriage ruling as "the one that ate the rule of law," to borrow a recent phrase from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
But our Governor, Mitt Romney, declined to support the effort. So did the Massachusetts Family Institute and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference. And so did conservative advocacy groups around the country, including the vaunted ACLJ and Alliance Defense Fund (ADF). Why? In the case of the ADF, they thought they could compromise with the homosexual extremists, hand them civil unions and benefits, and allow their early "marriages" to stand untouched, then (with a wink from the homosexual thugs) pass their terribly flawed VoteOnMarriage amendment. We've seen where that strategy led.
At a June 2005 press conference, Romney gave no reason for his opposition to the effort to remove of the four sodomy "marriage" judges. Could his inaction be explained by his promise to the homosexual activist Log Cabin Republicans in 2002, not to interfere with the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court's anticipated ruling for sodomy "marriage" (as recently reported in the New York Times)?
Q: Governor, what about the broader issue of judicial acitivism? Do you support or oppose the Bill of Address movement to recall the judges?
Gov. Romney: I'm not looking to recall the judges. I do however believe that justices should not legislate from the bench any more than legislators should adjudicate from the legislature. And I believe that there should be a separation of powers and responsibilities, and I believe that in this case that the Supreme Judicial Court engaged in legislating. I believe it was an improper decision on their part, and that's why I believe that ultimately the citizens should have the opportunity to make this choice, or their elected representatives.
When are Republican primary voters around the country going to wake up to Romney's deception? He never worked to preserve real marriage, but rather did all he could to implement it -- even without any errant court order! Romney also violated the Constitution by ordering the new "Party A/Party B" marriage licenses (while Mass. statutes STILL allow only man/woman marriage), and by ordering Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks to implement sodomy "marriages".
Here's the Iowa story:
Group wants judge impeached in same-sex marriage case
By Rod Boshart
The Gazette, September 12. 2007
DES MOINES - A nonprofit group calling itself Everyday America began a petition drive Wednesday aimed at pressuring state lawmakers to impeach and remove a district judge who issued a ruling declaring Iowa's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
Bill Salier, a former Republican U.S. Senate candidate from Nora Springs and one of the group's founders, said Everyday America is seeking support for an impeachment petition that states Judge Robert Hanson "knowingly violated the bounds of the Iowa Constitution" in issuing the controversial opinion, which also violated his judicial oath.
"The people of this state must take a stand to stop government officials from overstepping the Constitution in order to change society as they see fit. It is time we must start holding our government to account," the online petition states."Some government officials will continue to overstep their authority unless 'We the People.' demand it stop," according to the petition. [Read more...]
Friday, September 14, 2007
We're disappointed to learn from DCU Center in Worcester that the transgender-PFLAG conference, "Transcending Boundaries," is not being held there again this year. This weekend is announced on their award-winning MySpace as the 2007 conference dates, but no location is given. Interesting how after our revelations of the past year, the Transcending Boundaries web site is no longer updated, and the conference (if it's being held at all) is being kept quiet. Too bad -- our brave undercover agents were all set to go out to Worcester! (They were just not sure yet which gender and outfit to choose.)
"Transcending Boundaries" -- It's just what the name says: There are no boundaries, no limits on behaviors. No such thing as male or female in their world, unless they say so. No such thing as "normal". Anything goes: little children identified as "transgender"; bisexuality; pansexuality; BDSM; polyamory, drag kings, drag queens, fetish, etc. The only thing missing (give them time) was bestiality. (But wait -- does "pansexuality" include bestiality???).
Last year's fascinating workshops included:
- Dr. Norman Spack (Children's Hospital, Boston) on "Coming out as a child or adolescent as transgendered or transsexual and the parents’ process of acceptance." [Spack promotes hormone treatments for pre-pubescent "transgender children."
- Supporting Gender Variant Youth in Today’s Schools
- Legal Issues and Being Kinky -- How to Talk About BDSM/Leather/Fetish (New England Leather Alliance)
- Redefining Masculinity: How and Why Transmen [female-to-male transsexuals] are Changing the Definitions of Manhood
- Queer Spirituality
- FEMME-ininity: GenderQueer Femme Identity and Misogyny within the Queer Women’s Community
Who's welcome at the conference? "All bisexual, pansexual, trans/genderqueer, and intersex people and [their] allies!" What are their "interests" listed on their MySpace?
Activism, Activist, Bi, Bi Culture, Bi Curious, Bi Friendly, Bi Inclusive, Bi Men, Bi Network, Bi Women, Bisexual, Bisexual Community, Bisexual Culture, Bisexual Erasure, Bisexual Groups, Bisexual Meetings, Bisexual Men, Bisexual Network, Bisexual Pride, Bisexual Support Groups, Bisexual Women, Bisexuality, BDSM, Celebrate Bisexuality Day, Children, Cisgender, Coming Out, Community Building, Cross-dressing, DL, Down Low, Drag, Drag King, Drag Queens, Families, Fathers, Fetish, Fluid, FTM, Gay, Gay Straight Alliance, Genderfuck, Genderqueer, GLBT, GLBTIQ, Grandparents, GSA, Hetroflexable, Intersex, Lesbian, Leather, LGBT, Marrige, MTF, Mothers, on the DL, on the Down Low, Pansexual, Parenting, PFLAG, Poly, Polyamorous, Polyamory, Poly Pride Day, Post Queer, Same Gender Loving, SGL, Straight But Not Narrow, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer, Questioning
Monday, September 10, 2007
We don't understand why Romney asked Senator Craig to step down as the head of his Senatorial campaign committee. Romney has said over and over that we must respect all people, no matter what choices they make in their lives. In June 2005, he called for a “high degree of respect and tolerance for people whose lifestyle and choices and orientation is as they may choose.”
In his Boise news conference, Senator Craig said: "I did nothing wrong at the Minneapolis airport." We ask Mitt Romney: Was Craig's typical homosexual behavior at that bathroom OK, or wrong? If you asked him to step down from your campaign, you must think it's wrong.
But the homosexual "lifestyle" very commonly includes anonymous sexual encounters in public bathrooms. So, what's the problem with Sen. Craig's behavior, Mitt? We thought you advised us to respect all lifestyles and choices? Why aren't you respecting Senator Craig's lifestyle and choices? Craig was accused as far back as 1982 of such behavior, in the Congressional page sex & drugs scandal. See YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RntWGPEjoo Were you unaware of this, Mitt?
More questions for candidate Romney: Is homosexuality wrong? Is it morally wrong? Are there public health and decency considerations accompanying the homosexual "lifestyle" choice? Is there a middle ground on this issue?
Who's guilty of hypocrisy here: Senator Craig, or Mitt Romney?
Sunday, September 09, 2007
[I]n the aftermath of the Massachusetts court decision, Mr. Romney, though aligning himself with the supporters of a constitutional amendment [banning homosexual "marriage" but establishing civil unions], did order town clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Some members of Log Cabin Republicans say that in doing so, he ultimately fulfilled his promise to them despite his own moral objections.
In the year prior to the Court's marriage ruling, Romney promised homosexual activists he'd "keep his head low" and do whatever the Court ordered. From the Times:
Calling Mr. Romney a flip-flopper on gay rights would be overly simplistic, Mr. Spampinato [a homosexual activist and former aide) said. But he conceded that his old boss had promised the Log Cabin members that he would not champion a fight against same-sex marriage. ...
Mitt Romney seemed comfortable as a group of gay Republicans quizzed him over breakfast one morning in 2002. Running for governor of Massachusetts, he was at a gay bar in Boston to court members of Log Cabin Republicans. Mr. Romney explained to the group that his perspective on gay rights had been largely shaped by his experience in the private sector, where, he said, discrimination was frowned upon. When the discussion turned to a court case on same-sex marriage that was then wending its way through the state’s judicial system, he said he believed that marriage should be limited to the union of a man and a woman.
But, according to several people present, he promised to obey the courts’ ultimate ruling and not champion a fight on either side of the issue. “I’ll keep my head low,” he said, making a bobbing motion with his head like a boxer, one participant recalled.
Romney has never been an advocate for real marriage, but in fact a facilitator for the establishment of homosexual "marriage", or its twin, "civil unions." But the Times reports,"Mr. Romney bristles when he is accused of shifting on the issue, as he has on abortion, pointing out that he has been consistent in personally opposing both marriage and civil unions between people of the same sex." No -- Romney has NOT always opposed civil unions. Our Romney Report documents that he immediately went to work with legislative leaders after the Mass. court ruling (Fall 2003) to craft a civil-unions style law (Washington Post report, 11-20-03). Then in 2004 he strong-armed conservative Republican legislators into supporting a constitutional amendment that included civil unions, while banning homosexual "marriage." From the Boston Globe(3/30/2004):
Through all the twists and shifts during the gay-marriage debate this year, there was one constant: 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed every measure that would grant gay couples civil unions in the constitution. That all changed yesterday, however, when 15 of that 22-member bloc broke away at the urging of Governor Mitt Romney and voted in favor of a proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but create Vermont-style civil unions. Those 15 members provided the margin of victory, observers from both camps said yesterday after the measure passed by just five votes. In the end, the 15 agreed that approving a measure that they viewed as highly undesirable was preferable to the possibility that nothing would be sent to the state ballot for voters to weigh in on.
Also, Romney refused to support the original proposed Massachusetts marriage amendment in 2002, absolutely defining marriage as one man and one woman, apparently now wanting to ban domestic partnerships and civil unions. Bay Windows reported at the time (3-28-02):
"Romney was unaware his family members had signed the amendment petition, said [spokesman] Fehrnstrom, and he does not support the "Protection of Marriage" amendment. "He is opposed to gay marriage, but in the case of the 'defense of marriage' amendment Mitt believes it goes too far in that it would outlaw domestic partnership for non-traditional couples. That is something he is not prepared to accept."
Saturday, September 08, 2007
1. Lambda Legal pushed the Iowa case in a county court (judge-shopped), in a state where they figured no public official would call for the judge's impeachment. All the outrage among conservatives over this, but no one's calling for the judge to be booted? Presidential candidate Mitt Romney dared not demand the judge's ouster, as it would have shown up his failure in Massachusetts to do the same -- though he now poses as a heroic defender of real marriage.
In December 2005, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit with the Polk County Court on behalf of six same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Iowa, arguing that denying marriage to same-sex couples violates the equal protection and due process guarantees in the Iowa Constitution, and prevents these couples from taking care of each other and their children.... Lambda Legal has planned a series of Town Hall meetings around Iowa in the next couple of weeks to introduce the plaintiffs to residents and keep alive the idea that equality is the only right way for Iowa to proceed. (InNews Weekly, 9-6-07)
What else does Lambda Legal do? It supports GLBT activism in schools. It tells cruisers for anonymous "gay" sex how to avoid trouble with the police, publishing its very own Little Black Book of advice on the subject. (Did Senator Craig lose his copy?):
If you cruise in parks, bathrooms or other spaces open to public view, trust your instincts, be aware of your surroundings -- and know your rights. While Lambda Legal and other groups are fighting against the ways police target men who have sex with men, having sex where others might see you and take offense can subject you to arrest, publicity and other serious consequences. If you feel unsafe, you should leave.
CRUISING SAFELY ... [read more...]
2. Unitarians. Right next to the Massachusetts State House is the international headquarters of the Unitarian Universalist Association. (Note: it's not a "church" but an "association.")
The Unitarians have taken a leading role in pushing for homosexual "marriage" here and across America. The UU Association also hosts a group (somewhat underground at the moment) pushing for polygamy ("polyamory awareness" -- they're still at the desensitizing stage, just making us "aware" of their "alternative sexual expression").
The "gay" couple in Iowa were "married" last week by -- surprise -- a Unitarian minister. In his welcome message on his "church" web site, do we see any mention of the Bible? God? Ten Commandments? Doctrine? Jesus? Truth? No, just words like: seekers ... questions ... values ... life enrichment ... social justice ... socializing ... journeys ... "the never-ending dialogue that is faith."
Thursday, September 06, 2007
The debate will focus on VALUES . . . Romney's universally acknowledged weakness. Voters may submit questions through the ValuesVoter Debate web site.
Check out the ValuesVoters' Contract with Congress, and the list of national leaders behind this effort. Many of these leaders have a full understanding of Romney's violation of the Massachusetts constitution in implementing sodomy "marriage," as well as his problematic record in other areas. So we at MassResistance have high expectations from the panelists!
Those behind ValuesVoters who have written critically of Romney include: Janet Folger ("Straw Poll and Brick Values"), Don Feder ("Mitt Happens"), Dr. Alan Keyes ("Keyes cites Romney as sole author of Massachusetts gay marriage policy: Nov. 5 'God and Country' speech"), and (back in 2003) Phyllis Schlafly ("It's Time To Rebuke The Judicial Oligarchy").
From WorldNetDaily, on the upcoming September 17 debate:
... Regarding the selection of WND's Farah, debate organizer Janet Folger said, "As long as I can remember I've been hearing complaints about the liberal media. I've heard about their power and undue influence. For too long the pundits have made their proclamations and people have fallen into lock step. But, not anymore."
Looking forward to the event, Farah said, "So often in presidential debates, questions are asked and answers don't address the questions. When that happens, I'm going to try to persuade the candidates to focus more precisely on what was asked."
Questions will also come from 40 of America's leaders including: Paul Weyrich, founder and president of the Free Congress Foundation; Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum; Don Wildmon, founder and chairman of the American Family Association; Judge Roy Moore, a WND columnist with the Foundation for Moral Law; Rick Scarborough of Vision America; and Mat Staver of Liberty Council....
Monday, September 03, 2007
Which one is the real Republican?