New book on gay marriage in Massachusetts

My new book will be available soon! 

Corrupt Bargains
How Gay Marriage Began in Massachusetts

by Amy L. Contrada

The book is a unique, 500-page documentary history of the constitutional crisis surrounding the implementation of gay marriage in Massachusetts, 2001-2007.

In 2003, Massachusetts became the first state to formally recognize same-sex marriage. In a 4-3 ruling, the state’s Supreme Judicial Court declared that the Massachusetts Constitution (written by John Adams) protected same-sex marriage as an inviolable right. This absurdity went unchallenged by the political elite who cared nothing for the constitution’s clear separation of powers. While the state’s marriage law was never changed, the executive branch (under Governor Mitt Romney) illegally implemented same-sex marriage – blindly accepting the court as the ultimate authority, despite widespread calls to reject its ruling.

CORRUPT BARGAINS is a unique history of how same-sex marriage began in Massachusetts. It is the only documentary account of the corrupt maneuvering of politicians and pro-LGBT special interest groups during this constitutional crisis (2001-2007). Massachusetts developed the template for the deceptive political strategies that would dupe the conservative establishment and citizenry across the country. The tactics behind the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling on same-sex marriage (2015) were crafted in Massachusetts.

The successful LGBT strategy was to ignore questions of morality and public health, invent “rights,” demand “fairness” and “equality,” and flood the zone with emotional propaganda. The achievement of same-sex marriage cleared the way for the next big goal of the sexual radicals: transgender rights.

CORRUPT BARGAINS is a case study of how corrupt government officials circumvent constitutional governance. The book provides a front-row view of these precedent-setting events. It has rescued rare sources from the memory hole, with up-to-date links in the 900 endnotes.

A NEW EDITION OF THIS IMPORTANT HISTORY IS IN THE WORKS -- available in early 2023.

Formerly available at Amazon, we have decided to CANCEL Amazon in light of the company's censorship of important books including 

The Health Hazards of Homosexuality.

MITT ROMNEY'S DECEPTION:
His Stealth Promotion of Gay Rights and

Gay Marriage in Massachusetts

by Amy L. Contrada

  
Mitt Romney's Deception reveals the former Massachusetts Governor's promotion of "gay rights," his unconstitutional implementation of "gay marriage," and his support for sexual-radical programs in the Massachusetts schools. The outrages Romney failed to halt set horrible precedents for radical leftist victories nationwide. Contrary to his claim that he defended marriage, the Constitution, traditional values, and religious freedom, he actually undermined them. This superbly documented history is a unique resource by an activist on the front lines of the culture war during Mitt Romney's term as Governor.

[First ed. publication date: Jul 16 2011]

Mitt Romney's Deception: First edition (2011)

MITT ROMNEY'S DECEPTION:
His Stealth Promotion of "Gay Rights" and

"Gay Marriage" in Massachusetts

(2011 edition)

by Amy L. Contrada

 
Mitt Romney's Deception reveals the former Massachusetts Governor's promotion of "gay rights," his unconstitutional implementation of "gay marriage," and his support for sexual-radical programs in the Massachusetts schools. The outrages Romney failed to halt set horrible precedents for radical leftist victories nationwide. Contrary to his claim that he defended marriage, the Constitution, traditional values, and religious freedom, he actually undermined them.

Contrada's research will prove invaluable in assessing Mitt Romney as a Presidential candidate. Focusing on the issue of "gay rights," Contrada documents his largely untold history as Governor. During those years (2003-2006), Romney:
* worked closely with homosexual activists and pro-gay rights advisors
* implemented "gay marriage," violating the Massachusetts Constitution
* pushed a constitutional amendment strategy doomed to failure, and ignored the call to remove the "gay marriage" judges
* funded and promoted GLBT indoctrination in the public schools through his Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and his Department of Education "Safe Schools" programs
* undermined religious freedom, failing to defend Catholic Charities in the "homosexual adoptions" fiasco
* continued or implemented radical GLBT programs in his executive departments

This superbly documented history has over 900 detailed footnotes. It is a unique resource by an activist on the front lines of the culture war during Mitt Romney's term as Governor.

Note: Adult content.

Publication Date: Jul 16 2011
ISBN/EAN13:1461028078 / 9781461028079

Mitt Romney's Deception: Print Edition Coming in July!

Update:

Print edition of my book due out in July!

Mitt Romney's Deception: His Stealth Promotion of "Gay Rights" and "Gay Marriage" in Massachusetts

By Amy L. Contrada

Stay tuned!

Mitt Romney's Deception: His Stealth Promotion of ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘Gay Marriage’ in Massachusetts (NEW BOOK)

[7-20-2011 NOTE: The E-book edition is no longer available.]

Just Published: A Hard-Hitting Book on Mitt Romney’s Pro-Homosexual Record while Governor of Massachusetts

Massachusetts pro-family activist Amy Contrada has just released her definitive study of Mitt Romney’s role in implementing ‘gay marriage,’ promoting GLBT ‘rights,’ and supporting the sexual-radical agenda in the Massachusetts schools while Governor. The book is now available at Amazon.

Mitt Romney’s Deception: His Stealth Promotion of ‘Gay Rights’ and ‘Gay Marriage’ in Massachusetts

By Amy L. Contrada

$9.99 at Amazon Kindle (2nd Kindle Edition, March 2011)

Contrada details how Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney supported the homosexual and transgender agenda on same-sex ‘marriage,’ sexual-radical indoctrination in the schools, and societal transformation – while posing as a defender of the Constitution and traditional family values.

Mitt Romney is no conservative, despite his attempts to appeal to that element in the Republican Party. He is an ‘establishment fixer’ – a preserver of the status quo at best, or a promoter of social liberal causes and institutions at worst. In Massachusetts, the establishment – protected and advanced by Romney – was uniquely committed to the radical homosexual and transgender agenda.

Conservatives will find Contrada’s research invaluable in evaluating Romney as a Presidential candidate. Even those uninterested in Romney will find this a fascinating record of sexual-radical activism, whether for same-sex ‘marriage’ or school programs promoting GLBT ‘rights.’ The book is a rare combination of political history and analysis, enlivened by uncompromising commentary from a front-line activist.

Focusing on the issue of ‘gay rights,’ Contrada documents Romney’s largely untold history as Governor of Massachusetts:

• How Romney implemented same-sex ‘marriage’ while ignoring the Massachusetts Constitution.

• How Romney followed a constitutional amendment strategy doomed to failure, while ignoring the possibility of removing the judges who ruled for same-sex ‘marriage.’

• How Romney undermined the principle of religious freedom and failed to defend Catholic Charities in the ‘homosexual adoptions’ fiasco.

• How Romney implemented radical homosexual and transgender programs in his Department of Social Services and Department of Public Health.

• How Romney funded and promoted homosexual and transgender indoctrination in the public schools through his Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and his Department of Education ‘Safe Schools’ programs.

• How Romney worked directly with radical homosexual activists to promote their self-defined ‘rights.’

• And much more.

The book is superbly documented with over 900 detailed footnotes directly linked to sources. It includes a compendium of Romney’s public statements related to ‘gay rights’; contemporary commentary; a detailed timeline covering Romney’s implementation of same-sex marriage; extensive detail on sexual-radical indoctrination in the Massachusetts schools; and many previously unpublished photographs. It is a unique resource by an activist on the front lines of the culture war during Romney’s term as Governor.

Contrada holds a B.A. summa cum laude (Tufts University), an M.A.T. (Brown University), and a Diploma in Violin Making. She is a 40-year resident of Massachusetts. Contrada has been a reporter, researcher, writer, and office staffer for the pro-family organization MassResistance (Waltham, MA) since 2004.

Dianne Wilkerson, MassEquality Champion, Jailed for Accepting Bribes

Dianne Wilkerson, former super advocate for GLBT causes in the State Senate, has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for accepting $23,500 in bribes. Those are the bribes they know about. The sentencing judge "assail[ed] the state's political culture." 

Here's Wilkerson marching in the 2006 Boston Pride parade with her good friend from MassEquality, Marc Solomon. Talk about the culture of corruption.

(MassResistance photo)
[See our post from Sept. 23, 2006 on the Wilkerson-MassEquality alliance.]

From the Boston Globe:

US District Judge Douglas P. Woodlock agreed with Assistant US Attorney John T. McNeil, who argued that Massachusetts politics have become so cynical that two former House speakers convicted of federal crimes — Charles F. Flaherty and Thomas M. Finneran — were “welcomed back like they were some sort of heroes’’ at State House ceremonies on Wednesday. Neither Flaherty nor Finneran was sentenced to prison.

“It’s clear the sentencing imposed for criminal conduct here and, frankly, in other industrial states, hasn’t been sufficient,’’ said Woodlock. Referring to a culture of political corruption in Massachusetts, Woodlock said, “That Gordian knot has not been cut. People go back to do it again.’’

"BlueMassGroup" Earns Hate Group Certification

BlueMassGroup is hereby certified as a hate group. 


They hate conservative Republicans. 
They hate MassResistance.
They hate social conservatives, like Attorney General candidate Jim McKenna -- because he's pro-life, pro-real-marriage, and supports DOMA.
They hate conservative Congressional candidate Jeff Perry.


They like Bay Windows, which prints phony interviews with candidates.

Romney's Pro-"Gay Rights" Legal Counsel Endorsed by Radical GLBT Lobby

The GLBT lobby – including its transgender members – have just unanimously endorsed former Gov. Mitt Romney’s Chief Legal Counsel for State Representative. That would be Daniel Winslow, Esq.

We always knew that Romney’s legal staff was really working for “gay rights” while pretending to just enforce the “law” (the unconstitutional Goodridge marriage Court ruling). It was Winslow who himself made law (with the Governor’s assent), changing the marriage licenses in May 2004 – without the required Legislative authorization – to read “Party A & Party B” instead of “Bride & Groom”. Unbelievable.

 

For those new to MassResistance, we’ve pointed out since 2004 that same-sex marriage is still not legal in Massachusetts. The marriage statute still reads “man/woman”, and the GLBT lobby can’t get their bill allowing marriage “regardless of gender” to a vote (as confirmed by Winslow). The Court told the Legislature (not Winslow and Romney) to make that change, but they never have!

Winslow’s website makes no mention of social issues. (He’s right in line with the state Republican establishment on that!) He does show off his old bike in a sappy nod to the Scott Brown truck.

That’s all we need: another RINO in the State House! Our old friend, Tom Lang (another RINO) at KnowThyNeighbor.org had a long conversation with Winslow at the Mass. Gay & Lesbian (& Tranny) Political Caucus meeting recently:

Massachusetts Gay Lobby Endorses Mitt Romney's Attorney for 2010 House Seat

The Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus (MGLPC), the Leading LGBT Lobby Organization and Key Architect for the Strategy Securing Marriage Equality, Has Endorsed Republican Daniel Winslow (9th Norfolk) And Former Mitt Romney's Chief Legal Counsel Over Democrat Challenger Stanley Nacewicz For the Massachusetts House of Representatives

Led by Co-Chair Arline Isaacson, the MGLPC voted unanimously in last week's annual meeting to endorse the Republican, Daniel Winslow over his Democratic challenger, Stan Nacewicz for the Massachusetts House Seat representing the 9th Norfolk District in Fall 2010. This District seat was formerly held by Richard Ross (R) [who marched in Boston Pride this year] who vacated it when he succesfully ran for Scott Brown's (R) Massachusetts Senate Seat after Brown's historic victory took him to Washington, DC.

Arline Isaacson touted Republican Dan Winslow for his support of The Goodridge Decision, his zero tolerance of hate crimes and told the Caucus gathering, "Winslow is what we need," in terms of a Republican that understands LGBT issues.  Isaacson also gave a bit of insight into Winslow's history as the Romney attorney that changed our state's marriage license wording from "Bride and Groom" to "Party A and Party B" …

But what was interesting was that Isaacson provided the Caucus with Winslow's answers to her standard nine topic questionnaire on civil rights issues that all candidates are given.  Dan Winslow answered "Yes" to all subjects ranging from Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights to HIV Funding to Opposition of DOMA to Choice except one...the Transgender Civil Rights and Hate Crimes Bill. …

So what does KnowThyNeighbor [Tom Lang] think about this?  I interviewed Dan Winslow extensively after the Caucus endorsement meeting.  On the subject of Marriage Equality post Goodridge, Winslow says that Massachusetts needs legal updates.  Winslow told me that during the Romney days many within the administration insisted that MA marriage licenses continue to read "Bride and Groom" as, according to Winslow, some wanted same gender couples to "have to decide which would be the bride and which would be the groom" or in other words force same-sex couples to humiliate themselves.  Winslow was the one who pushed the "Party A/Party B" nomenclature as one of respect and dignity for same sex couples and a general equality for all parties entering into marriage.  Winslow wanted to make me understand that he has 3 important legal changes to state laws post Goodridge that to him are of the utmost urgency.  One, changes to current birth certificates which would recognize same sex couples.  Two, the inclusion of "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships" as impediments to MA marriages (currently, two people of the same gender could be married to one another in MA while being part of a dom partnership in Washington State to another person).  And Three, that MA courts must retain the jurisdiction of divorce when it comes to our same-sex marriages. … [emphasis in original]

(Read the complete post here.)

Winslow is even moving towards supporting the Transgender Rights bill. Now that’s what we call extreme. (We thought the Republican Party didn’t want to associate with “extremists”.)  

Why do these guys have an R next to their name? They’re really fifth columnists, working to undermine traditional values from within the Republican Party.

What more is needed than this to prove that Mitt Romney was actively working for “gay rights” while Governor? He surely understood his Chief Counsel’s bias, and most likely, shared it. Lots more on that soon.

Meanwhile, Romney has the gall to continue to present himself to the gullible conservatives attending Family Research Council’s “Values Voters” conference in D.C. this weekend. “Protect Marriage” and “Champion Life”!!! Yeah, right.

++++++++++

P.S. Dan Winslow commented on Tom Lang's post on 9/17:

Dan Winslow said...

Many thanks Tom. Just to clarify, the "bride/groom" discussion refers to others outside the administration who were lobbying me against changing the form. I was not referring to conversations within the administration. This endorsement means a lot to me personally and I am proud to have the support of Democrats as well as Independents and Republicans on these issues as well. We need to work together to move forward.

Confirmed Today: Gay Marriage STILL Not Legal in Mass.!

For years now -- since 2005 -- the homosexual lobby has filed and refiled its bill to legalize "gay marriage" in Massachusetts. They know that the law as it now stands refers to "man/woman", "husband/wife" relationships as marriage. Today, the Judiciary Committee once again sent the bill to "study" -- meaning, they killed it. But the very existence of this bill over the years confirms that we are correct that "gay marriage" has never been made legal in Massachusetts.

SHELVED TODAY:
House Bill 1708 
AN ACT TO PROTECT MASSACHUSETTS FAMILIES THROUGH EQUAL ACCESS TO CIVIL 

MARRIAGE 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority 

of the same, as follows: 

SECTION 1. Chapter 207 is hereby amended by adding the 

following new section:— 

Section 37A. Any person who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of this chapter may 

marry any other eligible person regardless of gender.

Why would the Judiciary Committee continue to bury this bill? We believe they don't want to draw attention to the fact that all the "gay marriages" since 2004 are fraudulent.

The Goodridge couple, who helped start the chaos, are now "divorced".

But they never had a valid "marriage" to begin with!

They don't want the citizens to focus on the overreach by the Supreme Judicial Court. They don't want the citizens to remember that the Court (unconstitutionally) ordered the Legislature to change the marriage statute in 2003 -- and the Legislature failed to act. And they don't want the citizens to focus on the overreach by then-Governor Romney, who without any Constitutional or statutory authority ordered the Department of Public Health to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and ordered Town Clerks and Justices of the Peace to perform these illegal "marriages".

Don't expect these jokers to tell us WHY they shelved the bill. No transparency here.

Senator Cynthia Creem & Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty

Senate & House Chairmen, Joint Judiciary Committee

Scott Brown Going Wobbly on Gay Rights?

Is this what conservatives supported in electing Scott Brown? I don't think so! Let's hope this is just wishful thinking  on the gay activists' part. Then again, pro-gay Romneyites are advising Brown. Hold the line, Scott!

From EDGEBoston (GLBT news), Feb. 1:

"Are Sen.-Elect Scott Brown’s Views on Gay Rights Changing?"

 

Graham Wilson, a Political Science Professor at Boston University, believes Brown’s views on social issues will evolve in time.

"I don’t know his stand on (gay marriage) in detail but I do think he will moderate and has shown signs of doing so already," Wilson told EDGE. "Now that he has the Republican nomination, his challenge is to avoid defeat in general elections that will be held in what for him are likely to be less favorable circumstances."

Someone who is familiar with Brown’s positions on LGBT issues is Scott Gortikov, the Executive Director of Mass Equality, who said Brown has expressed "consistent opposition to LGBT equality" as a State Senator.

Gortikov does hold out the hope that Brown may be inclined to be more supportive of the LGBT community on certain issues considering the company he will be in.

"He is a junior Senator from a Massachusetts delegation and this is a delegation that has supported issues of equality for a long time," Gortikov said. "(Brown) touts not only his traits of independent thinking but also his conservative credentials. There may be nuances to his thinking when it comes to future votes on LGBT issues."

Bay Windows (linked with EDGE) also posted an "open letter" to Scott Brown, asking for a "dialogue". They're "awaiting his reply."

Martha Coakley Was Keynote Speaker at Lesbian Gay Bar Assoc. Fundraiser

As Attorney General, Martha Coakley had no problem helping the radical Massachusetts Lesbian Gay Bar Association raise money. She was keynote speaker at their May 2007 fundraising dinner.

MLGBA luminaries.

See her speech here. Excerpts:

Access to civil marriage for gays and lesbians is the law of the Commonwealth. I applaud now, as I did at the time, the Supreme Judicial Court's decision in Goodridge. And as your Attorney General, charged with responsibility for upholding the law, I will do whatever I can to see that the rights of same-sex couples to marry is protected. I am also personally committed to that....

We also know that if the proposed [anti-gay marriage] amendment goes on the ballot, Massachusetts will spend the next year and a half besieged by anti-gay activists and will be the recipient of zealous rhetoric and invective from across the country. If that battle is necessary, you have my support....

We cannot allow hate to occupy any legal space in Massachusetts.  We cannot legislate hate away, but we can hold those accountable who act upon it and that's why it is important to develop and implement effective civil rights programs in our schools....

I strongly encourage our legislators to defeat it [the marriage amendment] and to close the door once and for all on prejudice and unequal treatment.

She vowed to uphold the "law" and protect the "right" for gays and lesbians to "marry" -- this despite the fact that the legislature still has not changed the statutes to enable same-sex couples to "marry", as instructed by the Supreme Judicial Court in 2003! (See the homosexual lobby's pending bill here.) What "law" is Attorney General Coakley upholding?

She labeled those who oppose "gay marriage" prejudiced and hateful. She is also committed to "hate-crimes" laws and homosexual programs in the schools. And she won't forget "civil rights" for "bisexuals" and "transgenders". 

If you believe in traditional values, Martha Coakley really despises you -- but labels you the "hater".

Romney Strikes Again: Pushes "Gay & Transgender Rights" Ordinance in Salt Lake City

When we heard the news that the city council in Salt Lake City just approved a "gay rights" ordinance (covering both "sexual orientation" and "gender identity"), we knew in our gut that Mitt Romney was behind it. Remember, he's running for President in 2012. He wouldn't want to appear a "bigot".

Sure enough... A homosexual blog connected to an anti-Mormon documentary  ("8: The Mormon Proposition") on the Proposition 8 defeat of "gay marriage" in California posted this:

On November 10, 2009 several highly placed people featured in the upcoming documentary film 8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION were contacted by well-placed people inside the Mormon Church in anticipation of an "historic statement against discrimination" to be made by the Mormon Church.



They were told, "Watch what we are about to do. You will be pleased."



At this hour gays and lesbians all over the world hope that the Mormon Church's announcement will not be yet another Mormon public relations smoke screen and result in action that will result in full marriage equality for the LGBT community world-wide.



Since the release of the trailer for 8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION, intense scrutiny has been focused on Mormon involvement in the passage of Proposition 8 and allegations that the Mormon Church set up the infamous NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE which was the key player in Maine's recent ban on gay marriage.



Sources close to those who called our cast and production team alerting us to the upcoming Mormon statement on discrimination say that Mormon Mitt Romney has recently put pressure on his own church to extend an olive branch to the gay community to try and deflate the anticipated negative press that will come from the release of 8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION that would likely damage his hope for a successful 2012 presidential bid.



Ironically (and we suspect in step with the Mormon's anticipated statement on discrimination) Mormon-owned KSL TV released an article on their web site saying "Romney appears to be front-runner in 2012 election."




The homosexual blog Towleroad picked up the Mitt Romney connection.

Counterfeit Marriage Rejected in Maine

Press Release from Matt Barber at Liberty Counsel:

Lynchburg, VA – Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, issued the following statement on news that the voters of Maine have rejected counterfeit “same-sex marriage” by 53% - 47%:

“There’s good news and bad news here,” said Barber. “The good news is that even in one of the most liberal States in the Union, Maine, the people have once again rejected the ridiculous and oxymoronic notion of ‘same sex marriage.’ The momentum has again shifted – hopefully for good this time – in favor of protecting legitimate marriage. A counterfeit is a counterfeit. An orange is an orange no matter how much you want it to be a turnip. This isn’t about ‘marriage.’ It’s about hurting and broken people desperately seeking affirmation of an objectively deviant lifestyle. One that, even in their heart of hearts, they know to be a dead end. As for the militant ‘No on 1’ homosexual activists? I’m reminded of spoiled children dressing up and playing house, refusing to come in when mom calls for dinner.

“Here’s the bad news. The margin of victory could have been greater. Many behind the ‘Yes on 1’ campaign, rather than simply telling the truth, chose the Neville Chamberlain approach. They merely circled the wagons around the word ‘marriage,’ even suggesting that ‘domestic partnerships’ (‘gay marriages’ by another name) are acceptable. This makes no sense. If that’s a viable compromise, then why not simply allow 'gay' duos the word ‘marriage’? It’s an incongruity that demands an explanation. This is an historic battle for the minds and souls of our children – for our very culture. The mealy-mouthed approach must end. This is not just about ‘marriage.’ It has everything to do with forced affirmation of homosexuality – under penalty of law. Indeed everyone who fought hard to defend marriage in Maine is to be congratulated, but if it weren’t for a brave group of truth tellers – Paul Madore, Peter LaBarbera and Brian Camenker [of MassResistance] – who came to Maine in the final hour to hold a press conference and address the pink elephant in the room – homosexual deviancy and the radical ‘gay’ agenda – counterfeit marriage might have prevailed.”

Proof: "Gay Marriage" Still NOT Legal in Massachusetts (July 2009)

Today (July 14, 2009), the Massachusetts Judiciary Committee will consider the bill to legalize "gay marriage". That's right -- "gay marriage" is still NOT LEGAL in Massachusetts!

The current Massachusetts marriage statute allows only man/woman, husband/wife couples. So Rep. Byron Rushing has filed a bill, every session since 2004, to change the law to allow same-sex couples to marry. His bill reads:

H1708: Chapter 207 is hereby amended by adding the
following new section:—
Section 37A. Any person who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of this chapter may marry any other eligible person regardless of gender.

Why has the Legislature never voted on this? Why has the press never recognized that the law was never changed?

Legal means permitted by law.

Rep. Byron Rushing smiles as he sponsors the most radical bills

in the Mass. legislature, including legalization of "gay marriage"

and decriminalization of sodomy.

Even the Supreme Judicial Court recognized that, and told the Legislature to change the marriage statute back in 2003, which it never did. Only because of Mitt Romney's promise to the Log Cabin Republicans do we have phony "gay marriage" -- now celebrated by 16,000 couples. Romney's orders to his executive branch officials to implement such "marriages" was unconstitutional, lacking statutory authority. So those "marriage" licenses aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

One reason MassResistance is so hated by the GLBT movement is that we've pointed this out for years. And the 16,000 "married" same-sex couples just don't want to admit that they're part of a Big Lie.

Note: The law criminalizing sodomy has still not been overturned either. Since sodomy is the basis for "gay marriage," the GLBT lobby's bill to decriminalize sodomy will also be heard today. Can't have a "marriage" without consummation!

Sodomy:
- Anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
- Copulation with a member of the same sex.
- Bestiality.
- Any of various forms of sexual intercourse held to be unnatural or abnormal, especially anal intercourse or bestiality.

Anti-Prop 8 Demo in Northampton Pushes "Transgender Rights"

Northampton, Massachusetts -- site of the nation's first major "Transgender Rights" march last June (documented by MassResistance, with video and photos) -- saw its own anti-Prop 8 demonstration on Saturday. But in Northampton, the cause includes "transgender rights" too -- not just "homosexual marriage".

What caught our eye on YouTube was this video of a "male-to-female" transsexual speaker, Lorelei Erisis.

You must watch this to see where our society is going. Men wanting to be women, changing their bodies and names (though rarely their faces or voices):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utKIpCqA5-o

"Ladies and gentlemen of all genders and persuasions, thank you for coming out..."

And if you don't want to go along with this insanity, you're a "hater" -- according to our President-elect too, not just the radicals assembling in Northampton.

Here is a photo of Lorelei speaking:
Remember that President-elect Obama has promised equal rights for the whole GLBT community -- "T" meaning transgenders or transsexuals. ("Gender identity" is the code language used for trannies.) Clearly, there is no bottom to this pit of confusion, sadness, and perversion into which these people have fallen. Yet our leftist political leaders will encourage even more troubled people to fall in. (See MassResistance, 3-8-08)

(The GLBT blog Reiter's Block has more photos of the Northampton radicals empowered by Obama's promises.)

Howie Carr Let Romney Off the Hook on "Gay Marriage" Lies

Left: Howie Carr

Right: Gregg Jackson

One of these guys has the courage to stand up to Mitt Romney's lies.

Howie Carr, WRKO talk show host and Boston Herald columnist, had Romney on his show for a few minutes on December 21. Another WRKO host and writer, the alert Gregg Jackson (Pundit Review Radio, Sundays at 7 p.m.), heard Romney was on and called in to ask him a burning question: Why did the Governor issue the unconsitutional orders to his Dept. of Public Health, Town Clerks, and Justices of the Peace that began the phony homosexual "marriages" back in 2004? We broke this story shortly after it happened.

Now Howie should understand this issue, and what Romney was up to. He's received all of our research. Why didn't he challenge Romney when he evaded the question and lied? What's up, Howie?

Romney was specifically asked about changing the MARRIAGE LICENSES to read "Partner A & Partner B" (instead of "husband & wife"). But he did a little sleight of hand, hoping no one would notice he answered about BIRTH CERTIFICATES (which he hadn't ordered be changed from "father & mother"). This is how stupid he thinks we all are ... and maybe he will fool most of the people.

Listen to the audio here.

See Gregg Jackson, Mitt Zombie Calls Me "Delusional."

From BizzyBlog today: Mitt Romney Calls Gregg Jackson ‘Delusional’; What Does That Make Romney?

... Mass Resistance has posted the audio and transcript of a call that took place on the air during the Howie Carr show on the afternoon of December 21 on WRKO in Boston.
The caller was Gregg Jackson, who is co-host of Pundit Review Radio on Sunday evenings on WRKO and is co-proprietor at the Pundit Review blog. Howie Carr’s guest was Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney, who in the course of answering Jackson’s question, showed exactly why he is, indeed, objectively unfit.
Keep in mind that Gregg is the author of “Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies,” a book that has earned rave reviews from the likes of Thomas Sowell (”political and media spin are shot to pieces by hard facts”) and David Limbaugh (”There is not a better one-stop-shop item to refute with evidence and examples the liberal lies.”).... [Read more.]

Hugh Hewitt Told Romney to Defy Mass. Marriage Ruling in 2003, Now Fully Backs Romney

[photo: BizzyBlog.com]

So ... in November 2003, Hugh Hewitt, pseudo-conservative talk show host and columnist, told then Governor Mitt Romney to defy the unconstitutional Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court homosexual "marriage" ruling.

Could this be the same Hewitt who has written a fawning biography of Romney (which for some reason is not on his list of books on his TownHall site)? The same Hewitt who constantly sings his praises? The same Hewitt who has demeaned the MassResistance "Romney Deception" report? What could po$$ibly have changed hi$ mind on $omething a$ ba$ic a$ whether a pre$idential candidate re$pect$ and uphold$ the Constitution he $wore to uphold? Maybe Hewitt doesn't think constitutions matter any more?

It's always fun going through old files. Here's what we found, written just two days after the Goodridge ruling from the Massachusetts Court. (Excerpts; emphasis added:)

Just Say "No": Calling Governor Romney and the elected representatives of Massachusetts
by Hugh Hewitt
The Weekly Standard
11/20/2003

"JOHN MARSHALL has made his decision," Andrew Jackson is said to have remarked in the aftermath of a Supreme Court decision he disliked, "now let him enforce it."

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney would be well advised to ponder that line long and hard over the Thanksgiving holidays.

It is an interesting time for the Massachusetts Supreme Court to have seized control of the elected branches in its state, given the connection between Thanksgiving and the Bay State....Now, in the aftermath of Tuesday's radical diktat from four justices to Massachusetts' elected representatives, Americans are interested in the state's future as well.

Romney should seriously consider indifference. The governor noted that the ruling declaring same-sex marriage a mandate of the Massachusetts constitution is contrary to the sweep of recorded history, but it is more than that. The ruling is also absurd in its reasoning and breathtaking in its arrogance....
The decision is illegitimate, and the appropriate response will be to ignore it.... Editorial writers will shout. Senator Kennedy may even brand Romney a Neanderthal, as he did Justices Brown, Owen, and Judge Kuhl earlier this month.

But the storm will pass and the people of Massachusetts will applaud. They didn't sign up for a banana republic run by pretenders in robes, and no one in the state's illustrious history ever sacrificed life or limb--from Boston Harbor to Concord, Antietam or the battlefields of Europe and Asia--for the proposition that four judges get to change everything when they decide to conjure up a reason for doing so.

Romney and the legislature ought to stand back and say no. In fact, if the court threatens with penalties, they ought to threaten back. An outrageous overreach is only as strong as the passivity with which it is greeted.

This isn't primarily about gay marriage, and it isn't primarily about Massachusetts. It is primarily about self-government and limiting courts to their constitutional duties. And Massachusetts, again, has a central role to play.

Is Romney Working with Log Cabin Republicans to Remove Stories from Web?

What's happened to the 2002 Bay Windows story on Mitt Romney and his "gay" Log Cabin Republican supporters? (Bay Windows is the Boston GLBT newspaper.) It used to be readily available on the web. (And Bay Windows used to have a neat section called "The Romney Files" -- which they've also removed, along with their archives search page! Hmm...) Now, a search for "Gay GOP touts Romney as good for the community" pulls up a blank page... But we've saved it! And we're reprinting it here for all you Republican primary voters.

Bay Windows
Gay GOP touts Romney as good for the community
By Laura Kiritsy, 3/28/2002

Mitt Romney rode his wild success organizing this year's Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, all the way back to Massachusetts and right onto center stage as the Republican candidate for governor. But the Olympic gold dust has begun to settle -- Democrats have already taken aim at his inconsistent stance on abortion and criticized his positions on a host of other issues, from fixing the state's budget crisis to managing the Big Dig. And now that gay-friendly Governor Jane Swift has bowed out of the running, gay voters may also be wondering: Is Mitt good for gays?

Good enough, said several gay Republicans who spoke with Bay Windows, including Abner Mason, Swift's deputy chief of staff. "I am absolutely confident that as governor he would continue the commitment to gay equality that was started with [former Republican Governor William] Weld and continued with [former Republican Governor Paul] Cellucci and Swift," said Mason. "He will equal, if not better, the record of Weld, Cellucci and Swift." Mason recently met with Romney in his capacity as Swift's chief policy adviser, and said they discussed ``a wide range of policy issues including gay rights." He declined to disclose the details of that conversation.

Lt. Governor candidate Patrick Guerriero, Swift's gay former running mate, agreed that Romney would be appealing to gay voters. Guerriero noted that Romney did receive support from gay Republicans in his failed 1994 bid for U.S. Senate and currently has gay Republican Jon Spampinato, who actively worked to recruit Romney in the governor's race, on his campaign staff. "The reality is there's a difference between 1994 and now," Guerriero told Bay Windows. "The issues are much more talked about. All the candidates will be called upon to clearly state their positions on gay issues" and the next few months will be a defining period, said Guerriero. "I think you'll see that his policies and stands are going to be rooted in the party of Abraham Lincoln."

Romney got his first chance to prove himself when, just days after announcing his candidacy in the driveway of his Belmont home, it was revealed that his wife, son and daughter-in-law had signed a petition to put the anti-gay "Protection of Marriage" constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot in 2004. Romney campaign spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom told Bay Windows that the family members signed the amendment petition -- which would not only ban gay marriage, but all legal protections for same-sex couples in Massachusetts -- without realizing how restrictive the amendment actually is. "They read the bold print," said Fehrnstrom. "They did not read the fine print."

Romney was unaware his family members had signed the amendment petition, said 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." Asked whether Romney supported the domestic-partnership legislation -- which would provide health insurance benefits to the same-sex partners of state employees and give municipalities the choice to do the same -- currently pending before the state legislature's House Ways and Means Committee, Fehrnstrom said he was unsure. In the week since announcing his candidacy, he added, Romney has been involved in "an intense series of issues briefings" intended to bring him up to speed on issues currently facing Massachusetts citizens.

"I think it's very good that Mitt Romney came out and said he opposes the ballot initiative because it goes too far and is extreme," said Gary Daffin, co-chair of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, a non-partisan organization. But he also adds, "I think we have some more work to do with Mitt Romney" on gay issues.

While Romney's stance against gay marriage -- which is consistent with his position during his '94 senate campaign -- is typical of many political candidates of both major parties, Daffin may have a point. Romney has had to fend off accusations from his fellow members of the Mormon Church that he called gays "perverse" in 1993, and has repeatedly denied the charge. In 1994 he expressed support for "don't ask, don't tell," the U.S. military's ban on openly gay soldiers.

He did, however, pledge to support the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would ban job discrimination based on sexual orientation, and other civil rights protections for gays in the areas of housing and credit. He also promised to bring the initiatives begun in Massachusetts to protect gay and lesbian youth to the federal level.

But what struck the gay GOP during that campaign, according to Massachusetts Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), was Romney's accessibility to and comfort within the local gay community. Romney and his Republican primary opponent, John Lakian, attended an LCR-sponsored candidate's forum during the campaign, where they both competitively vied for the organization's endorsement -- which Romney eventually won. During the course of his campaign, LCR member and former president Mark Goshko told Bay Windows, Romney held several meetings with group members and at least two LCR members joined his staff. Though gay Republicans were by no means running Romney's campaign, "it was really a multi-level involvement," Goshko stated. "Our people were very involved officially and outside of [the campaign]." Given that past level of involvement, said Goshko, "I have no reason to think that things won't develop similarly this time." Goshko and LCR's current president Chris Ferguson, said they have spoken with Romney campaign advisers and are hoping to schedule a sit-down meeting in the coming weeks.

Romney has also come under suspicion for his Mormon beliefs, given the church's leadership on anti-gay efforts in the U.S., and its generally conservative reputation. His opponents have attempted to use his religion to paint him as conservative on social issues, a characterization both Fehrnstrom and Ferguson said is unfair. "There's a rush to characterize Mitt Romney as a right-wing social conservative. I don't think that's entirely fair," said Ferguson. "There may be a lot of reasons at the end of the day not to support him or not to like him, but he should have the opportunity to define for himself what his positions are and not to have people mischaracterize him," he said.

NY Times: Romney Kept Promise to Gays to Allow "Gay Marriage"

The New York Times is finally looking into Romney's "gay rights" record in Massachusetts. See "Romney’s tone on gay rights is seen as shift" (New York Times, 9-8-07). Romney doesn't want this to come out:

[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."

Lawsuit Against Church in NJ: Coming Soon to Mass.

One of the many ways "the sky is falling": LifeSite News reports that a lesbian couple in New Jersey is suing a church for refusing to let them have their "civil union" ceremony on church property. It won't be long before we see similar lawsuits in Massachusetts against churches that refuse homosexual "marriage" ceremonies on their properties. Just as in New Jersey law, Massachusetts bans discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of "sexual orientattion." Freedom of religion? What's that?

Lesbian Couple Files Complaint against Church for Refusing Civil Union Ceremony
OCEAN GROVE, New Jersey (LifeSiteNews.com) - A New Jersey lesbian couple has filed a civil rights complaint against a Christian seaside retreat association that refused to facilitate their "civil union." Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster filed the complaint June 19 with the state attorney general's office on the grounds of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation after the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association declined the use of their Boardwalk Pavilion for their civil union ceremony, planned for September.

Bernstein and Paster demanded "whatever relief is provided by law" including unspecified "compensatory damages for economic loss, humiliation, [and] mental pain." New Jersey's anti-discrimination laws currently forbid those who "offer goods, services, and facilities to the general public" from "directly or indirectly denying or withholding any accommodation, service, benefit, or privilege to an individual" on the basis of sexual orientation.

However the OGCMA has stated that it must adhere to the rules of the United Methodist Book of Discipline, which forbids homosexual civil unions from being performed in churches and other areas for worship. "The facility that they requested is a facility we have used exclusively for our camp meeting mission and worship celebrations since 1869," Scott Hoffman, OGCMA's chief administrative officer told LifeSiteNews.com. ...

Here's the Mass. law:
Chapter 272: Section 98. Discrimination in admission to, or treatment in, place of public accommodation; punishment; forfeiture; civil right
Section 98. Whoever makes any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, which shall not include persons whose sexual orientation involves minor children as the sex object, deafness, blindness or any physical or mental disability or ancestry relative to the admission of any person to, or his treatment in any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement, as defined in section ninety-two A, or whoever aids or incites such distinction, discrimination or restriction, shall be punished by a fine of not more than twenty-five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, and shall be liable to any person aggrieved thereby for such damages as are enumerated ... All persons shall have the right to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law and applicable to all persons. This right is recognized and declared to be a civil right.