Monday, July 31, 2006

"Gay" Lobbyist Arrested for Solicitation Was Member of Gay/Lesbian Youth Commission

Bill Conley (far right) cheering on children at Youth Pride 2005 parade, sponsored by Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. Photo (c) 2006 MassResistance

What kind of person is chosen to serve on the Commission for Gay and Lesbian Youth?

Bill Conley, recently arrested for solicitation of college boys, is head GLBT lobbyist at the State House. Conley has been a proud member of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. And now, we assume, he will hold his head up high as a member of the new INDEPENDENT Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth.

They're so full of "PRIDE" . . . these people know no SHAME.

Saturday, July 29, 2006

Prominent "Gay" Lobbyist Arrested for Solicitation of College Boys

You will know them by their deeds. William Conley, openly homosexual lobbyist for the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, was arrested on July 8 for soliciting oral sex from college students, reports the Boston Herald today ("Sex-solicit sting nets lobbyist for gay group"). Gee, why didn't we see this story in Bay Windows?

We've published a photo showing Conley standing on the State House steps with the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" banner on "Youth Pride" day. The adults running the GLBT political groups are certainly working hard to find fresh meat.

Conley is often seen prancing around the State House as if he owned the place. Why, we just ran into him in a Rep's office a few weeks back (after his arrest!) pushing for the new, independent, unconstitutional "Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth." Always dressed immaculately in a business suit, he conveys respectability to the max. His testimonies pushing homosexual indoctrination in the schools are quietly confident. At the hearing on the marriage amendment in May, he stood at the front of the hearing room near the Legislators' panel, acting as MC to the hearing, ushering his people to the table at just the right moment, using his height and clean-cut image to intimidate. Apparently, the stress of this role-playing builds up and he has a tremendous need to access "oral relief" (see story below).

This is the person whose salary House Speaker DiMasi helped raise at the MGLPC fundraiser a few nights ago!

From the Herald article:

A Springfield man busted in an alleged attempt to solicit sex from University of Massachusetts students in return for cash is a paid lobbyist for a pro-gay marriage advocacy group. William G. Conley, a lobbyist for the Massachusetts Gay & Lesbian Political Caucus, was arrested by UMass police after allegedly posting a message on the Internet bulletin board offering work to a college student.

Conley, 59, allegedly replied in an e-mail to an undercover cop posing as a student that he was willing to pay $50-$150 for “oral relief,” according to a report in The Republican of Springfield. Police arranged a meeting and arrested Conley on July 8. ...

Robert Paine Blog: Romney Created "Same-Sex Marriage"

Check out Robert Paine, Esq. Written by an attorney, there's lots to digest on this blog in his series of articles entitled, "The Governor’s New Clothes; How Mitt Romney Brought Same-Sex Marriage To America."

John Haskins first alerted us to Paine's important argument "that it is not even clear that the Legislature could constitutionally create 'homosexual marriage.' The term 'marriage' is written into the state constitution. This presents an insurmountable obstacle for all three branches of government. There is abundant Massachusetts and federal case law demonstrating that no term used in the constitution can be redefined except by a constitutional amendment."

Robert Paine was a Founding Father, signer of the Declaration of Independence, first attorney general of Massachusetts, speaker of the Massachusetts House, member of the Continental Congress and a justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

We also understand from Paine that the new "Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" violates the Constitution, by essentially creating an independent fourth branch of the Massachusetts government.

Friday, July 28, 2006

The Ghosts of History

From John Haskins:
The ghosts of history (and the present) are whispering in our ears

For those who believe Mitt Romney's claim that he is "defending" marriage and the natural human family, and that he was forced to strike down his own oath of office, nullify a state constitution and order illegal and void homosexual "marriage":

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." - Benjamin Disraeli

For Governor Mitt Romney:

"You can preach a better sermon with your life than with your lips." - Oliver Goldsmith

For those who believe that:
~ there is such a thing as a "homosexual (or bisexual or transgendered) child"
~ that Americans who hold to traditional moral values are beating them up and forcing them to commit suicide by the tens of thousands
~ that to rescue these "homosexual children" we must indoctrinate every American child to believe that anal sex and lesbianism are normal, innocent, and beautiful behaviors and that the amply proven harm that causes and results from them is imaginary
~ that nature and God and thousands of years of human history and common sense and 150 years of psychological and sociological research into how boys and girls need both fathers and mothers are irrellevant; and that any rebuttal to the surreal propaganda of "gay families" is just seathing, murderous, homophobic "hate":

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

For those who believe that the Next Great Hope of the Republican Party (much less the Democrat Party) will do anything to restore our constitutions, our values, our rights as parents to parent our own children, to reverse the gradual criminalization of Judeo-Christian values, or even read with an honest mind the constitution he or she swears to defend:

"We are perpetually being told that what is wanted is a strong man whonwill do things. What is really wanted is a strong man who will undo things; and that will be the real test of strength." - G.K. Chesterton

For those who think that anti-faith, anti-truth, anti-reality, anti-child, anti-family, anti-heterosexuality, anti-humanity "tolerance" and "diversity" are leading to anything but destruction, social anarchy and political tyranny -- and for those who have noticed that these fruits of atheistic relativism are being propagandized as having the stamp of approval of Jesus Christ and "true religion":

"Atheism in itself has no cohesive force. Whatever social cohesion it has provided so far has come more from its destructive hostility to the Christian civilization it has totally failed to improve on." - Joseph Sobran

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Legal Meaning of "Marriage" Already Excluded "Gay" Couples

Comment by John Haskins
Associate Director, Parents' Rights Coalition

Notice in the article on the recent Washington state ruling, "
Supreme Court upholds state gay marriage ban," it appears that once again the attorneys on our side miss a fundamental argument: The concept of "marriage," in legal and colloquial use, already has a definition that excludes homosexuality.

Even the Goodridge decision explicitly admitted that under Massachusetts statute, "marriage" is the union of two persons of the opposite sex. There can be no fundamental right to take advantage of a right to do "A" by doing something that is not "A" and merely calling it "A". An entirely new and separate right would have to be "found" in a constitution -- or invented by a legislature. You cannot hijack an existing legal term and pretend that it means what even the outlaw judges of the Goodridge court admitted it could not legally mean.

"Marriage" is by definition an opposite-sex contract. Homosexuals absolutely do have a legal right to marry -- but like anyone else, they must marry members of the opposite sex, because that is what "marriage" is legally. That they do not want marriage -- but want something completely different to be called "marriage" -- does not mean that they can strike down constitutions and democratic self-government by stripping language, and thus law, of its obvious meaning.

So much of the Left's constitutional and political revolution is based on our accepting their clever "word lies." The right to "privacy," which sounds extremely reasonable, actually means "the right to kill another human being." We are not even on the playing field if we do not realize that redefining words -- while pretending to be faithful to those words -- is actually an act of legal, intellectual, and spiritual war. Why do we accept that they own words? If they own words, they own reality and law and theology and morality and everything else.

If words really don't matter, why do we serve a God who calls Himself "the Living Word"? If our enemy owns words, they own God. If we refuse to defend words and concepts and meaning itself, and we prefer to piddle around in the shallow water of legal technicalities, are we really the people of the Living Word?

The failure to assert the specific legal meaning of "marriage" at every opportunity is an example of incompetence and a profound failure to comprehend the level at which the Culture War is being fought, both inside and outside the courtroom. If "marriage" is a term without actual legal and linguistic meaning, then of course it can be argued that homosexuals have a right to redefine it for the rest of society.

Saturday, July 22, 2006

House Speaker DiMasi Agrees with Coakley-Rivera on "Hate"

What game is the Boston Herald editorial staff playing? They know full well that House Speaker DiMasi is not at all upset with Rep. Coakley-Rivera's charges of "hate" leveled at Rep. Philip Travis (and anyone who believes homosexual "marriage" is absurd and unacceptable). The Herald is calling for Coakley-Rivera to apologize for her remarks. Why would she, when she knows DiMasi has totally sold out to the extremist homosexual agenda? Why did he include her in his leadership to begin with, if he didn't agree that her viewpoint was valid, or at least a "voice" he wanted represented on his team?

Doesn't the Herald know that DiMasi will be the guest of honor at the upcoming homosexual lobby fundraiser on July 27?
And what does that lobby advocate: "No discrimination in the Constitution" -- meaning, any attempt to ban "gay marriage" is hateful discrimination. That's all that Coakley-Rivera was charging. (Look at their buddy group,, which has published the names of all the signers of the marriage referendum in order to intimidate them. They hold banners saying anyone who signed is a "bigot.")

DiMasi was honored by another homosexual activist group last winter. (See
photo of DiMasi receiving his award from the group "My Age".) He's been very public about his full support of the "gay" agenda. Just read Bay Windows.

Maybe the Herald means to say that the whole "gay marriage" movement should apologize to everyone else in Massachusetts?

Friday, July 21, 2006

New Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth: Precursor to Hate Crimes Tribunal?

This past Wednesday, radical openly lesbian state legislators called names and -- in hysterical outbursts -- stifled debate on Governor Romney's veto of the new extra-constitutional independent Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. (And don't forget the other youth to be "protected" by this Commission: Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Questioning, Polyamorous, etc.).

Sorry as this debate was, and silly as the reason given by the Governor for vetoing it ("it is duplicative"), at least it was vetoed. But whichever candidate is elected Governor in 2006, there will not even be vetoes of similar nonsense! MassResistance warns: a Hate Crimes Commission (or "tribunal" as in Canada) will be next ... possibly thrown in as a stealth "amendment" to a budget item as was done here.

From the State House News Service, here's the "debate" on this devious ploy from "gay" State Senator Jarrett Barrios, a.k.a. "Senator Fluff".

Rep. Donato said question comes on the governor’s veto in H 5000, section 4. Romney vetoed the section, he said, because it was “duplicative.” The section outlines membership on a “permanent” 27-member unpaid commission on gay and lesbian youth. It establishes the commission as “an independent agency of the commonwealth and shall not be subject to the control of any other department or agency.” Rep Donato said if the chair hears no objection, we will consider no action taken on this matter.

Rep. Travis objected. Rep. Donato, in the chair, made a motion to call Rep. Travis to the rostrum where they had a private conversation, along with Reps. Jones and Petrolati.

The House then suspended rules and question came on the veto override. Rep. Donato began calling the vote and Rep. Travis was asking to be recognized. Rep. Donato said for what purpose does the gentleman rise? Rep. Travis said to speak on the issue.

Rep. Travis said we are pressing our green buttons and reading these after the fact. I wish to let you know what this is. I would like to ask someone carrying this to come forward and say why we have to have a duplicate commission. This is a brand new section that is called gay youth commission. It is redundant and I would like to know the need for this and why it does not come under any state department whatsoever. It is separate and equal to something we have on the books. None of us voted against the original commission. Why do we need it? I don’t think we do.

Rep. Coakley-Rivera [openly lesbian] said for a long time I sat here, for eight years, and I listened to the hate in this chamber and from the man who just walked away and that is why we need a commission - so children do not commit suicide and people like the gentleman who walked away don’t continue to feed hate, so children don’t take drugs - children feel something is so wrong with them that they take their own life. This is why we need two commissions.

Rep. Travis asked to be recognized. Rep. Donato banged the gavel and called a brief recess.The chamber had fallen silent and a handful of members applauded Rep. Rivera. [Wait -- we thought it was Coakley-Rivera... Names change, sexual identities change... She used to be just Rivera.] Rep. Coakley-Rivera was recognized again and said I will move on.

Rep. Travis said point of personal privilege - the rules of the House say a colleague does not attack a colleague no matter how vehemently they feel. The lady at the microphone attacked me. We have just done a line item on the question of suicide and overrode that item. That point has been settled. I wish she would address the question I asked.

Rep. Donato, in the chair, said the chair will pay close attention to the debate.

Rep. Coakley-Rivera said because there is so much hate and bigotry about gays and about me and my sexuality. I was one of the few who made it out and can stand here and talk. I am able to love a woman in a loving and caring way and not everyone can do that. God made me and my straight parents made me and love me for who I am. That is why we create commissions to help people understand differences of the world and help children understand the differences of the world so they can better deal with hate and bigotry in the world. We all know what this is about. It’s about people who don’t like gays and lesbians and don’t like their lifestyles and they use the church to excuse their hate and bigotry. We need as many commissions to deal with children committing suicide and taking drugs and dealing with gay and lesbian issues. Thank you Mr. Speaker.

Rep. Travis said if my lips said to you what that lady just said I said, I would apologize to all of you. I never spoke any word she said. She answered why we need a second commission. If the commission in place is doing its proper job and exposing children to different lifestyles, I accept that. It is the law. [While we disagree with Rep. Travis on these points, at least he spoke up!] We are creating a second commission on the same activity. She said we need all the time and money to influence our children. My point of view is different and exposure at the earliest age is wrong and parents tell me that on a regular basis. My job is to not let this pass. It is not in the public interest. I stand on that premise. I do not attack any gay or straight person for any reason. I have never done that and am not going to start this evening. You are picking on me as a straight person and I resent that. I have great respect for the lady.

There was a smattering of applause for Rep. Travis.


Rep. Malia [openly lesbian] moved reconsideration, Rep. Donato said. As Rep. Travis called to be recognized, Rep. Donato quickly called the vote in the affirmative on a voice vote. Rep. Peterson said I doubt the vote. Rep. Donato said can I have a brief recess. Many lawmakers headed to the front of the chamber. RECESSES: After several minutes, Rep. Donato at 5:46 pm said Rep. Petrolati moved to recess until 6 pm. Motion adopted.
[Now what was happening during the recess? Did the "gay" lobby move in and threaten to flood hundreds of thousands into challengers' campaigns, unless certain vulnerable reps changed their votes???] ...

Rep. Travis said ... The vote was 52 on this issue. I remember a discussion in caucus about removing outside sections from this budget. This is a subject that is controversial. It has had no public hearing. It is called a substitute for the governor’s commission. I have heard no complaints in my district or from the other side that that commission did not function well within the school system.... This issue can be taken up at another time and be spoken about in a hearing room where people can give testimony on both sides. They would not be under any legislative or executive branch oversight. Under that premise of accountability, I hope the veto is overridden.

With Rep. Tobin asking to be recognized, Rep. Donato, in the chair, opened the roll call. Rep. Atsalis voted no on the last roll call, with unanimous consent.

Senator Fluff gets his way; lots of little "GLBTs" will be created by this act of the Massachusetts Legislature -- though not by the Creator.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Homosexual Programs in Schools Lead Children to Dangerous Sex Change Info

Open Letter to Massachusetts State Representatives:

Please UPHOLD GOV. ROMNEY'S VETOES of funding for programs pushing homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality in our public schools. These programs lead children to dangerous sex change information, planting the idea that this is something to seriously consider for themselves.

The GSA's ("gay straight alliance" clubs in the schools) and the proposed commission supported by this funding lead students to BAGLY -- the "Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth" -- and associated groups like it around the state. That name alone should alarm you. It's an organization headed by a male-to-female transsexual who lectures young people on the bizarre world of transgenderism and transsexuality.

If you look at the BAGLY website, their Resource page leads children to a sex-change website. On this "transgender care" site, young people can read about the "penile inversion technique" of "neo-vagina construction" -- complete with graphic illustrations ... and many other unnatural and dangerous things.

See the BAGLY resource page and the sex change site it connects children to. Is this what our children should be exposed to?

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

"Gays" Label Heterosexuals "Breeders"

Listen up, all you heterosexuals. Did you know you're just "BREEDERS"?

Where's the hate? Surprising that the Boston Globe would even report this latest spew from the Culture of Death. We've seen this insult hurled before in the "gay" press, but not reported in the MSM. From "A new intolerance visits Provincetown: Police say gays accused of slurs" (July 14, 2006). Note that the police do not consider these incidents hate crimes:

PROVINCETOWN -- Town leaders here are holding a public meeting today to air concerns about slurs and bigoted behavior. And this time, they say, it's gay people who are displaying intolerance.

Police say they logged numerous complaints of straight people being called "breeders" by gays over the July Fourth holiday weekend. Jamaican workers reported being the target of racial slurs. And a woman was verbally accosted after signing a petition that opposed same-sex marriage, they said.

The town, which prizes its reputation for openness and tolerance, is taking the concerns seriously, though police say they do not consider the incidents hate crimes....

Monday, July 17, 2006

What Children Learn at Boston Pride

A few scenes from Boston's Pride parade, June 2006. What are these young girls learning? Note the sign behind the person in the black beater: "Be nice to sex workers"

As we look at photos from "Pride Week" in Boston, we keep thinking about all the children seen at the festivities, and what they learned. The leader of the Revolutionary GLBT forces of Lexington, Meg Soens, was there with two of her young children, helping the ACLU of Massachusetts celebrate its assault on our values. (Maybe scenes from Pride will soon become part of the Lexington schools' curriculum?) Here are some of the things children saw on the street:

Topless women bikers
Young men dancing in clinging underwear
"Drag queens" everywhere
People handing out special anal intercourse condoms and lubricant
Men with black wings, faerie costumes, flaming wings
A man wearing a balloon headdress shaped like male genitals
Women from a "drag king" theater troupe in tight "beater" shirts, some without breasts
Sign reading "Love a Sex Worker"
"Tranny Daddy" and family
Bare-chested "dykes" with fresh scars from breast removal surgery
"Hedda Lettuce" blasting unbelievable vulgarities from a huge screen towering over the Boston Common -- PLUS
Large banner advertisements or signs leading them to:

  • (take their online "tour")
  • Bisexual Resource Center
  • Independent Pagans of New England
  • Tiffany (transsexual male-to-females)
  • MassEquality, PFLAG, GLSEN, BAGLY, GLAD, ACLU, etc.

And this is where the Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth (whether run by the Governor, or by Senator Barrios) would encourage our children to go.

Friday, July 14, 2006

To Our Fans

We'll be posting sporadically over the rest of the summer. Lots of family events happening, some travel. Didn't want the folks at Bay Windows to think anything was amiss.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Write Sodomy Into the Constitution -- By Any Means?

What will the Legislature do tomorrow, July 12, 2006 -- the date set for the state Constitutional Convention? On its calendar are two proposed marriage amendments, #19 (Sen. Barrios' ploy), and #20 (VoteOnMarriage's). Any of these things may happen:
  • Senate President Travaglini will postpone until November or December (then somehow it will just never come up before December 31). Question #20 will die at the end of the session. "It's time to move on."
  • Travaglini will call for a vote to adjourn. (The bad guys have the majority.)
  • A quorum will not show up. (The bad guys have the majority.) The ConCon won't even happen. Maybe the Governor will try to force them back into session; maybe not.
  • Question #19 will be taken up (originally our proposed bill to define marriage and ban "civil unions" in statute, illegally transformed through shenanigans involving Senators Barrios and the Senate President into an "amendment"). Since this would require a majority of the Legislature to pass, it will surely fail, since that many of our legislators have sold their souls to the CULTURE OF DEATH / GLBT Lobby.
  • Question #20 -- VoteOnMarriage's flawed amendment, which we do not support -- would not be taken up if #19 is. The GLBT lobby /Travaglini will say, "Why consider the definition of "marriage" twice? It's time to move on. We've discussed this subject enough!" (Leaving aside that #20 only needs 50 votes to pass on to the required second year's ConCon, and has entirely different wording than #19.)
  • VoteOnMarriage's amendment will come to a vote, and will get its 50 needed to pass on to next year's second, required ConCon.
Whatever happens, even the UNLIKELY final scenario, the VoteOnMarriage amendment is going to go down in flames eventually. It may take a few years, but it will happen. What better way to suck the blood of their opponents than to string them along over the next few years, exhausting their time, energy, money, good faith, hope. The GLBT strategy is to get the innocent VoteOnMarriage supporters to continue to focus on their amendment -- rather than defending our Constitution, removing the judges responsible for the Goodridge ruling, holding Romney responsible for unnecessarily issuing marriage licenses and ordering state officials to perform weddings, and dealing with the homosexual propaganda taking over our schools.

It's a great plan. As time goes by, more and more regular people fall by the wayside, tired of defending real marriage and normal family values. Tired of calling unresponsive or nasty reps. Tired of writing checks to VoteOnMarriage. Meanwhile, millions from the national GLBT activist groups -- the Gill Foundation, Human Rights Campaign, The Victory Fund -- will flow into the state. This is their beachhead. They will give it all they have.

If the amendment ever goes to the popular vote (in 2008), we predict it will lose. Most voters these days respond to emotion, not logic or moral arguments. By 2008, more "GLBT families" will be in existence, more homosexual indoctrination in the schools will have had its effect.

Even if the VoteOnMarriage amendment passes, no good would come of it. Current "homosexual marriages" would be validated. Two classes of unequal GLBT citizens would be created (some allowed to marry, some not), and the court challenge for that "injustice" is already in the works. (See the Court's invitation to the GLBTs below.) Civil unions would not be outlawed. A silly "reciprocal benefits" law might be passed that would open another Pandora's box.

But look at the
Supreme Judicial Court ruling yesterday. Though the GLBT activists are feigning surprise and disappointment that the SJC threw out their narrowly defined challenge to the VoteOnMarriage petition, even the Globe points out that they

... were heartened by a concurring opinion opinion written by justices John M. Greaney and Roderick L. Ireland that questions whether the proposed ban, if approved in 2008, would be constitutional.

Venturing beyond the scope of Reilly's certification of the ballot question, Greaney wrote that the 2003 decision legalizing same-sex marriage might be "irreversible" if the proposed amendment was held by the court to violate existing provisions in the constitution that guarantee equal rights.

"The only effect of a positive vote will be to make same-sex couples, and their families, unequal to everyone else," he wrote. "This is discrimination in its rawest form."

The ruling actually INVITED a challenge to the VoteOnMarriage amendment, should it be passed. Meaning, the SJC is prepared to do the unthinkable: rule a Constitutional amendment unconstitutional! (MassResistance/Article 8 Alliance warned of this last July, when the VoteOnMarriage plan was first announced.) In his concurring opinion, Justice Greaney (with Justice Ireland) writes:


Sunday, July 09, 2006

"Boston Pride" Recruited Volunteers for "Youth Pride"

All photos (c) 2006 MassResistance

These are the sorts of people who were put in touch with "GLBT Youth" by the Boston Pride organization. They directed "volunteers" to Youth Pride back in May, then
recently thanked all the people who showed up to "mentor" the youth. "2006 Youth Pride was a phenomenal success! Thank you to all the volunteers and supporters who came out to make the event a success!"

Remember that the "Youth Pride" event every May is a project of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and the prom that ends the day is put on by BAGLY.

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Marriage!

U. S. Supreme Court Decision on Marriage - 1885

"[C]ertainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth . . . than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; [the family is] the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guarantee of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement.”
-U. S. Supreme Court, Murphy v. Ramsey, 1885.

From the Stone Age? Certainly not "progressive" enough for Empress Margaret!

Saturday, July 08, 2006

Sex-Driven "Gay" Culture Cruel to Old Men

The "gay" lifestyle ... Once again we read the truth, from a "gay" man. We came across a sad article in InNewsWeekly: "Old gay men don't die, they're just pushed away." The author complains that their old age is one of loneliness and rejection (should they even make it past the land mines of AIDS and other diseases related to homosexual sex). Yet this is a "lifestyle" we're encouraging young people to embrace.

The natural thing is for one's sexuality to wane as one ages. For heterosexuals, this change is usually accompanied by relationships with one's own children and then grandchildren. That's because a heterosexual's natural sexuality usually produced children at some point. Since "gay" men (by definition) refuse to accept natural sexuality, most do not have children (except from some hetero relationship or adoption). As their bodies get old, the "gay" culture will not tolerate them as sex objects. And since so much of their earlier lives focused on sex -- so much of their energy was poured into what sounds like an exhausting existence -- they have little to fill this void as they age.

Now one might very well ask why doesn't this fellow just settle down and get "married"? (And P.S.: You might want to avoid the Fens and Herring Cove.)

Growing up we are taught to respect our elders; we are not encouraged to have sex with them. Not only does the general population frown upon intergenerational liaisons, but as a rule the aged are excluded from all things sexual. Middle aged individuals are expected to transform from if not vital, then at least potential, erotic beings into sexless geriatrics whose sole purpose is to dole out baked goods, financial support and advice. Most of the elderly heterosexuals I know seem to take this exclusion in stride, however for many elderly gay men this sexual segregation is the worst part of growing old. Raised in a culture where personal worth is integrated with sexual _expression and validation, many older gay men wake up to find both their buttocks and their sexual worth have fallen through the floor. It is not a welcomed discovery.

One need travel no further than the Fens in Boston or the dunes at Herring Cove in Provincetown to see this sexual exclusion in action. While the more junior varsity members of the gay community use these venues for a bit of anonymous slap and tickle, the attending senior set is more often than not left to their solitary devices. This is not for lack of trying. I have witnessed numerous elderly attempts at engagement with the younger men in these environments, but nine times out of ten they are either ignored or actively discouraged. The message could not be clearer: We may suffer your presence, old man, but not your participation. This dismissal is largely based on the fact old men rarely fit the mainstream definition of "hot." ...

Friday, July 07, 2006

No, Sodomy "Marriage" is NOT a "Civil Right"

People are not born homosexual, bisexual, transgender, or transsexual. But people are born black, white, Asian, or mixed race. Or short or tall. Or handsome or homely. God made them that way, and that can never change, no matter what emotional, spiritual, psychological, or cosmetic events or forces come into play.

Many people of color are incensed at the attempt by the activist GLBT's to equate race and "sexual identity." Check out the concerns of the Congressional Black Caucus back in March 2004: "Black caucus resists comparison of gay 'marriage' to civil rights." And our link to Boston's Rev. Eugene Rivers' column in the Weekly Standard.

Here's just one example of an email we recently received from a Massachusetts citizen:

Please put me on your E-Mail list. I am sick of MassEquality propagandizing me ... sick of the SJC's arrogant theft of my right to vote on an issue ... and sick of arrogant homosexuals hijacking the REAL Civil Rights Movement, the one I (as a proud black American) am old enough to remember first-hand.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Governor Romney Holds Back on "Gay Parenting"

At last week's press conference on the amendment, Governor Romney continued to hold back on what's wrong with gay and lesbian parenting. (See Bay Windows' report.)

Do we think most homosexual parents love their children? Sure. But -- do most of them bring their children up in a healthy environment? We have SERIOUS doubts.

Read the articles and interviews by the
daughter of a homosexual father describing the hell of her upbringing, and the long struggle she's had overcoming what she experienced. The star lesbian activist in Lexington, Meg Soens, was photographed at Boston Pride Parade with two of her young children. (What did her daughter learn from the parading young women who'd had their breasts removed?) What about "Tranny Daddy" strutting his/her stuff at Boston Pride with three kids and "wife" in tow? Or the Boston Sunday Globe magazine columnist, and man "married" to a man, who says he will bring his adopted daughter up with a "fierce pride."

We know that for all their public posturing,
homosexual male couples are rarely monogamous. And Senator Fluff, Jarrett Barrios, while very concerned about his son eating marshmallow fluff in school lunches, is apparently not concerned that the boy is learning from his two "daddies" that sodomy is healthy and normal.

This is what is wrong with GLBT "parenting". Why can't our Governor say so?

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

"Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" = Government Sponsored Endangerment of Children

Why is the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth (possibly soon to become an independent Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth?) so dangerous? Because it leads vulnerable, confused young people into contact with older GLBT activists -- some of whom may be sexual predators. This is yet another example of politically-correct DENIAL in our society. While many profess concern for child victims of sexual predators, here they let it run unchecked.

Here are some of the people and groups who've called for volunteers or noted their own volunteer activities at recent Commission events, such as the annual
Youth Pride day and BAGLY gay/trans prom at Boston City Hall. By way of comparison: Would we knowingly put our heterosexual teenage girls in touch with known prostitutes? Would we knowingly send them to events focusing on sex, staffed by older, single male "volunteers"? Yet the Commission believes these groups -- totally focused on sexuality -- are all completely trustworthy with young teens who are drawn to them through their own sexual curiosity.

PUMP (HIV peer support group/male sex workers)
Friends of the Governor's Commission on GLBT Youth (list of volunteer opportunities)
Lambda Car Club (homosexual antique car lovers)
GenderCrash (trans event host at Youth Pride)
Jesuit Urban Center parishioners ("Catholic" church that hangs rainbow banners)
Adult crossdressers - Anonymous
Perverts trolling for teen boys - Anonymous
Hate blog authors
Bay Windows readers
BAGLY adult staff and mentors

The Commission also poisons the whole youth population through the GSA's (gay clubs in the high schools) which the Commission supports. It also trains teachers and administrators in "Safe Schools" propaganda, and promotes speakers and "gay awareness" events in the schools.

Monday, July 03, 2006

Planned Parenthood Sowing "Sexual Identity" Confusion

[Handout from Planned Parenthood at GLSEN Boston Conference, April 30, 2005. Given to both children and adults.]

Warren Buffett's announcement that he'll give the majority of his fortune to the Gates Foundation was greeted with oohs and ahhs from most quarters. But how many people know that the Gates Foundation supports abortionists? Namely, Planned Parenthood.

And Planned Parenthood promotes not only baby killing, but homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism, and transsexuality. See
our report on Planned Parenthood's presentation at a recent GLSEN Boston conference. PP is always at the State House testifying for harmful, anti-parental-rights causes, such as "comprehensive sex ed" and school-based clinics. PP is also on the front lines of the GLBT culture war. The "Revolutionary Gender Model" diagram they handed out at the GLSEN conference (above) highlights a huge inconsistency regarding "sexual identity" in the GLBT movement . On the one hand, their propaganda says people are "born that way". On the other hand, often behind closed doors of GLSEN-type seminars, "sexual identity" is said to fluid, and can change throughout one's life. Which is it?

Saturday, July 01, 2006