More on "Safe Schools Czar" Kevin Jennings and the company he keeps:
We've pointed out that former Act Up member Kevin Jennings, along with homosexual activist David LaFontaine, were the two powers behind the hideous Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, as well as the Massachusetts law banning discrimination on the basis of "sexual orientation" in the Massachusetts public schools. Jennings worked closely with LaFontaine, so must have been on the same wave length regarding goals and strategies. Jennings was still living in the Boston area at the time of two notorious incidents involving LaFontaine:
LaFontaine was arrested on July 31, 1990 for "disturbing a public assembly" at the Massachusetts State House. There, at a press conference critical of an exhibit of pornographic homoerotic and anti-Catholic photos by Robert Mapplethorpe, LaFontaine shouted down the Rev. Earl Jackson, a Protestant minister and leader of Boston's African-American community.
A little over a month earlier, LaFontaine had participated in the attack on the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston on June 16, 1990. The demonstration involved members of Act Up. LaFontaine was quoted in the Boston Globe, identified as lobbying director of the Coalition of Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights, a "co-organizer" of the demonstration. At the time, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights described the incident, which LaFontaine acknowledged he had helped organize:
On that day, militants sought to physically disrupt the ordinations [of new priests] by entering the Cathedral. Prevented from doing so [by police], they then attempted to acoustically disrupt them by blowing horns and whistles, and by showering clergy and congregants with a torrent of insults, taunts, blasphemies, obscenities and invectives. Lesbians paraded in costumed mockery of the Catholic priesthood, lewd parodies of the Catholic liturgy were conducted within sight and sound of worshipers and sexually explicit signs were displayed . . . When the ceremony ended, priests and their parents, some of them elderly, who left by the side door of the Cathedral were surrounded and menaced by parts of the mob, struck with condoms, while others shouting, jumped up and down and pounded upon parked cars.
[Source: Press Release from Conservative Campaign Fund dated 9-14-94, in our possession, written by Peter T. Flaherty, CCF Chairman.]
Conservative Campaign Fund Chairman at the time, Peter T. Flaherty, wrote:
The Catholic League account only hints at the true vulgarity of the protest. Participants, some of whom were dressed in episcopal garb, engaged in simulations of oral and anal sex. The chants included, "You say No F---, we say F--- you." ... LaFontaine's involvement in this demonstration cannot be explained away. He has acknowledged taking part. He was a leader (and still is) of one of the three sponsoring organizations, the Massachusetts Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights. Another sponsor, ACT UP, was already well-known for its illegal and anti-democratic tactics. The infamous disruption of Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral in 1989 occurred just months previous to the Boston incident. LaFontaine knew he was associating with anti-Catholic extremists and was aware of the probability of violence. [Source: Ibid.]
Since Kevin Jennings was living in Boston at the time, and "palling around" with LaFontaine, someone should ask him if he took part in the disruption at the Boston Cathedral (perhaps as a veteran of the St. Patrick's riot?).
Four years later in 1994, Mitt Romney was running against John Lakian for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate candidate (vs. Ted Kennedy). In September '94, LaFontaine again drew a scolding, and was called out for "religious bigotry" targeting Romney for his Mormon religion. Lakian, who had received support from the organized homosexual movement, had included an inflammatory letter by LaFontaine attacking Romney in a fundraiser sent to 14,000 people. Candidate Romney was outraged, and the Conservative Campaign Fund called on Governor Weld to fire LaFontaine (who was still then Chairman of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth). [Sources: Flaherty press release; Boston Globe, "Romney blasts Lakian mailing," 9-2-94; Boston Herald, "Mitt rips Lakian on religion attack," 9-2-94.]
(Ironically, Romney has continued to court activist homosexuals throughout his political career, not understanding that LaFontaine was just a little more exhibitionist of his true thoughts.)
In the aftermath of the 2000 Fistgate incident, where GLSEN-Boston educators were caught on tape teaching young teens about fisting and other perverted sex practices, LaFontaine continued his vicious and twisted statements about those trying to preserve traditional values. Of Brian Camenker, head of Parents' Rights Coalition (now MassResistance), LaFontaine said that he promulgates "precisely the attitudes that make gay teens think that they might as well kill themselves."
Hateful actions, hateful speech. The legacy of homofascist groups such as Act Up.
Showing posts with label homofascism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homofascism. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Homofascist Intimidation HQ "Villa" Celebrated in Boston Globe
Hey, Prez-Elect Obama! Time to spread around some wealth! Take a look at this palace. And to think only two guys, Tom Lang and Alex Westerhoff, live here. It doesn't seem quite fair.
And what a couple they are. Thanks to the Boston Globe Magazine, we get a peak at their "villa" -- the chicest location for radical leftist fundraisers. (Just imagine what else goes on in these rooms.*)
One thing is for sure: The palace has been a base for harassing opponents of "homosexual marriage". One of its owners, Tom Lang, is the infamous cyber-bully behind the "KnowThyNeighbor" web site, which published the names of anyone who signed the pro-marriage referendum petition in Massachusetts a few years back.
Here's nice guy Lang in December 2006, shouting down a pro-marriage rally (which held a permit for the space) in Worcester. MassResistance posted a video of his vile disruption, where he screams at the participants that they're "bigots". He’s the chubby guy in glasses.
Mass. General Laws, Ch. 12, Sec. 11H:
Whenever any person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interfere by threats, intimidation or coercion, or attempt to interfere by threats, intimidation or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any other person or persons of rights secured by the constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights secured by the constitution or laws of the commonwealth, the attorney general may bring a civil action for injunctive or other appropriate equitable relief in order to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured.... [emphasis added]
The Boston press has gushed over the Lang-Westerhoff palace before. In 2007, we posted Boston Herald columnist Margery Eagan's 2004 excrescence over their lavish "wedding" and home. Eagan was apparently a guest. See our June 2007 post on the "Finneran-Lang-Eagan Axis of Evil":
Within two years of his glorious "wedding", Lang went on to publish the names of all who signed the VoteOnMarriage referendum petition on his KnowThyNeighbor site, and become a leading spewer of heterophobic hate speech. Watch him and his friends in this video (he's the chubby guy with glasses), revealing his intention to shut down any speech opposing his. And now how amazing is it that both Eagan and Finneran host talk radio shows? (This used to be the only outlet for conservatives in this state; now station managements are giving it over to the leftists.) From Eagan's column,"Same-Sex Marriage: Ordinary ceremony turns unique" (Boston Herald, 5-18-04):
The Reverend Professor Peter J. Gomes, [openly homosexual] (D.D., Honorary Fellow of the College, Plummer Professor of Christian Morals at Harvard University, and Pusey Minister in the Memorial Church, Harvard), provided a rare public endorsement on behalf of Deval Patrick at a Manchester-by-the-Sea fundraiser jointly hosted by Alexander Westerhoff and Tom Lang of Manchester and the Freedom to Marry PAC....
Alex Westerhoff and Tom Lang, whose Manchester-by-the-Sea "Villa in Construction" hosted the Deval Patrick for Governor fundraiser, have been close friends with the Reverend Gomes since Westerhoff immigrated to the United States from Germany in 1988. Westerhoff says that the attendees were in excess of 150 people in total and drew from a wide range of bi-partisan support from the Northshore and Boston who came out to hear and meet Deval Patrick. "I am honored that Reverend Gomes chose our joint event with Freedom to Marry in which to endorse Deval Patrick for Governor. Peter's words express, as only Peter can, the feelings of so many in Massachusetts as to the current administration and politicians in general, and how we need a leader like Patrick in the corner office," said Westerhoff. Reverend Gomes officiated at Westerhoff and Lang's marriage ceremony on May 17, 2004.
(InNews Weekly, 8-5-06)
And what a couple they are. Thanks to the Boston Globe Magazine, we get a peak at their "villa" -- the chicest location for radical leftist fundraisers. (Just imagine what else goes on in these rooms.*)
One thing is for sure: The palace has been a base for harassing opponents of "homosexual marriage". One of its owners, Tom Lang, is the infamous cyber-bully behind the "KnowThyNeighbor" web site, which published the names of anyone who signed the pro-marriage referendum petition in Massachusetts a few years back.
Here's nice guy Lang in December 2006, shouting down a pro-marriage rally (which held a permit for the space) in Worcester. MassResistance posted a video of his vile disruption, where he screams at the participants that they're "bigots". He’s the chubby guy in glasses.
It is our opinion that Tom Lang of Manchester-by-the-Sea should be prosecuted for violating the constitutional rights of citizens of Massachusetts who simply signed a petition to get a ballot question on marriage. Lang's goal was to intimidate anyone who questions homosexual marriage or homosexuality (then or in the future). Such intimidation is illegal in Massachusetts. Just look at what's happening to signers in California after the passage of Prop 8, banning homosexual "marriage". Lang provided the model for this tactic.
Mass. General Laws, Ch. 12, Sec. 11H:
Whenever any person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interfere by threats, intimidation or coercion, or attempt to interfere by threats, intimidation or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any other person or persons of rights secured by the constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights secured by the constitution or laws of the commonwealth, the attorney general may bring a civil action for injunctive or other appropriate equitable relief in order to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured.... [emphasis added]
Lang and Westerhoff were often seen at demonstrations and State House events. Here they are at a recent State House event -- in their usual position -- celebrating the corrupt action of the Legislature which had just denied the people their right to vote on sodomy "marriage":
The Boston press has gushed over the Lang-Westerhoff palace before. In 2007, we posted Boston Herald columnist Margery Eagan's 2004 excrescence over their lavish "wedding" and home. Eagan was apparently a guest. See our June 2007 post on the "Finneran-Lang-Eagan Axis of Evil":[MassResistance blog:] Lang's "wedding" was one of the first after the phony, illegal "gay marriages" began. He married his lovely bride -- oops, "husband" -- Alex, in a rose-bedecked church in Manchester-By-The-Sea. Eagan was apparently a guest of the two grooms. And Finneran [former Speaker of the House] issued a proclamation celebrating this sanctification of sodomy. The "husbands" seem to be very wealthy and well-connected, the event complete with bejeweled guests, opera singers, and a mansion to go home to. (Has Eagan returned for a party recently?)
Within two years of his glorious "wedding", Lang went on to publish the names of all who signed the VoteOnMarriage referendum petition on his KnowThyNeighbor site, and become a leading spewer of heterophobic hate speech. Watch him and his friends in this video (he's the chubby guy with glasses), revealing his intention to shut down any speech opposing his. And now how amazing is it that both Eagan and Finneran host talk radio shows? (This used to be the only outlet for conservatives in this state; now station managements are giving it over to the leftists.) From Eagan's column,"Same-Sex Marriage: Ordinary ceremony turns unique" (Boston Herald, 5-18-04):
[Eagan wrote:] ... Five minutes after Alexander Westerhoff and Thomas Lang, in tails and tux, walked down a white-carpeted aisle here last night, their wedding became not about same-sex or any sex, but about two people promising their lives to each other.
In many respects this wedding is "like any wedding," said officiating minister the Rev. Peter J. Gomes of Harvard University . "Preservice jitters . . . anxiety . . . confusion," he said. "And so we celebrate the ordinariness of the occasion."
In many respects this wedding is "like any wedding," said officiating minister the Rev. Peter J. Gomes of Harvard University . "Preservice jitters . . . anxiety . . . confusion," he said. "And so we celebrate the ordinariness of the occasion."
But Gomes also said there's "something quite unique and special" happening in this small chapel.You expected Gomes then to speak of history: Yesterday, for the first time, homosexual couples could wed in Massachusetts . Before yesterday this union would have been illegal. Instead, Gomes referred to the two men before him as "unique" in their love. Men who put "16 years' worth of thought and care and consideration" into getting married.
And so it was in many ways a traditional marriage. Each pew a garland of baby roses. Best man Alex Filias handing over the rings. Traditional vows: "I give you this ring as a symbol of my promise," said Westerhoff. "All that I am is yours, as long as we both shall live," said Lang.
Here's what was different: As the couples joined hands, Gomes pronounced them, not man and wife, but "partners for life" and "truly married in the sight of God and man." Lang and Westerhoff kissed twice - very quickly - then they received a proclamation of congratulations from the Massachusetts House of Representatives, signed by Speaker Thomas Finneran, who has long opposed gay marriage. It read: "What the SJC has granted, let no vote put asunder."
... last night in Manchester-by-the-Sea, about 100 guests - men in black ties and women in bejeweled gowns - celebrated their marriage with them. Singers from the Boston Lyric Opera sang arias by Puccini and Lehar. Lang and Westerhoff marched out of the church to a gospel rendition of "Oh, Happy Day," sung by the red-robed Majestic Ensemble. Westerhoff was occasionally in tears as the wedding party adjourned to the massive home the couple just built together.
Missing from the party, however, was Alex's mother, who disowned him, the couple said, after their Vermont civil union....
In 2006, a gala fundraiser for then candidate Gov. Deval Patrick (friend to Barack Obama) was held at the Lang-Westerhoff palace. InNews Weekly (a homosexual newspaper) reported:
Here's what was different: As the couples joined hands, Gomes pronounced them, not man and wife, but "partners for life" and "truly married in the sight of God and man." Lang and Westerhoff kissed twice - very quickly - then they received a proclamation of congratulations from the Massachusetts House of Representatives, signed by Speaker Thomas Finneran, who has long opposed gay marriage. It read: "What the SJC has granted, let no vote put asunder."
... last night in Manchester-by-the-Sea, about 100 guests - men in black ties and women in bejeweled gowns - celebrated their marriage with them. Singers from the Boston Lyric Opera sang arias by Puccini and Lehar. Lang and Westerhoff marched out of the church to a gospel rendition of "Oh, Happy Day," sung by the red-robed Majestic Ensemble. Westerhoff was occasionally in tears as the wedding party adjourned to the massive home the couple just built together.
Missing from the party, however, was Alex's mother, who disowned him, the couple said, after their Vermont civil union....
In 2006, a gala fundraiser for then candidate Gov. Deval Patrick (friend to Barack Obama) was held at the Lang-Westerhoff palace. InNews Weekly (a homosexual newspaper) reported:
Rev. Gomes endorses Patrick for Mass. Gov. -- Endorsement came at Manchester-by-the-Sea fund raiser jointly hosted by Alexander Westerhoff and Tom Lang (of Know Thy Neighbor) and the Freedom to Marry PAC
The Reverend Professor Peter J. Gomes, [openly homosexual] (D.D., Honorary Fellow of the College, Plummer Professor of Christian Morals at Harvard University, and Pusey Minister in the Memorial Church, Harvard), provided a rare public endorsement on behalf of Deval Patrick at a Manchester-by-the-Sea fundraiser jointly hosted by Alexander Westerhoff and Tom Lang of Manchester and the Freedom to Marry PAC....
Alex Westerhoff and Tom Lang, whose Manchester-by-the-Sea "Villa in Construction" hosted the Deval Patrick for Governor fundraiser, have been close friends with the Reverend Gomes since Westerhoff immigrated to the United States from Germany in 1988. Westerhoff says that the attendees were in excess of 150 people in total and drew from a wide range of bi-partisan support from the Northshore and Boston who came out to hear and meet Deval Patrick. "I am honored that Reverend Gomes chose our joint event with Freedom to Marry in which to endorse Deval Patrick for Governor. Peter's words express, as only Peter can, the feelings of so many in Massachusetts as to the current administration and politicians in general, and how we need a leader like Patrick in the corner office," said Westerhoff. Reverend Gomes officiated at Westerhoff and Lang's marriage ceremony on May 17, 2004.
(InNews Weekly, 8-5-06)
_________________
*Hmm... Now it seems Mr. Lang had decided to protect HIS privacy a little more (a right he denies others), and has had the Globe remove the link to more photos of his palace.
*Hmm... Now it seems Mr. Lang had decided to protect HIS privacy a little more (a right he denies others), and has had the Globe remove the link to more photos of his palace.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Rioting Lesbians at Smith College - What Was It Really About?
Yes, the homofascists would like our latest expose of the lesbian riot at Smith College last week to just go away (see the revealing videos.) . . . because it's about something much bigger than they want to admit. See Americans for Truth's eloquent explanation:
Traditionalists and people of faith should take great courage from the homosexual side’s totalitarian tendencies. This is no “civil rights” movement but a sexual special interest lobby espousing — with all the assurance of a fundamentalist — doctrines that run counter to natural law, healthy living, and Judeo-Christian history. Which is another way of saying that they are at war with truth.
Communists and fascists censor advocates of democratic freedom and independent religion. Darwinists expel critics of evolution from the academy. Officially pro-homosexual governments in Britain, Canada and other countries persecute Christians who voice their Biblical belief that homosexuality is a changeable sin. And radical homosexualists here in the USA trample on the rights of those who dare question the tenets of their activist movement, which is all of 100-plus years old (German “sexologist” Magnus Hirschfeld).
Take heart: people confident in their ideas don’t storm opponents’ speeches. Rather, they listen intently to them, and then present another viewpoint to compete in the marketplace of ideas. In the long run, homosexualists can’t compete with truth, and they seem to know it.
Traditionalists and people of faith should take great courage from the homosexual side’s totalitarian tendencies. This is no “civil rights” movement but a sexual special interest lobby espousing — with all the assurance of a fundamentalist — doctrines that run counter to natural law, healthy living, and Judeo-Christian history. Which is another way of saying that they are at war with truth.
Communists and fascists censor advocates of democratic freedom and independent religion. Darwinists expel critics of evolution from the academy. Officially pro-homosexual governments in Britain, Canada and other countries persecute Christians who voice their Biblical belief that homosexuality is a changeable sin. And radical homosexualists here in the USA trample on the rights of those who dare question the tenets of their activist movement, which is all of 100-plus years old (German “sexologist” Magnus Hirschfeld).
Take heart: people confident in their ideas don’t storm opponents’ speeches. Rather, they listen intently to them, and then present another viewpoint to compete in the marketplace of ideas. In the long run, homosexualists can’t compete with truth, and they seem to know it.
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Starting Our 4th Year!
Happy New Year!
It was three years ago that the MassResistance blog began, and spoke the truth that no one else had the nerve to speak. Not surprisingly, we have been subject to all sorts of harassment and abuse as a result. When they can't disprove the facts or argue convincingly from logic, they come after you personally, your family, and your home. But we will continue to speak the truth.
It was three years ago that the MassResistance blog began, and spoke the truth that no one else had the nerve to speak. Not surprisingly, we have been subject to all sorts of harassment and abuse as a result. When they can't disprove the facts or argue convincingly from logic, they come after you personally, your family, and your home. But we will continue to speak the truth.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Bay Windows Attempts Cover-Up
Lies, filth, and cruelty: Bay Windows, the extremist homosexual/transgender Boston newspaper, has attempted to cover up their role in damaging an Acton minor youth, whose mother has exposed the dangers their radical community poses to our society -- and especially to our children.
They have tried to scrub from the web two articles where they piled on in the attack on this family, and even published the child's name, working with an accomplice blog, QueerToday. But MassResistance has saved these articles, and will preserve them for posterity. (They've told at least one person over the phone that they never published the Sept. 27 article!)
Here's the September 27 piece they don't want you to see (which appeared only online, not in their print edition): "Anti-gay activist's daughter allegedly in Laramie Project cast," by Ethan Jacobs, 9-27-07, ejacobs@baywindows.com. Mr. Jacobs secretly contacted the child via Facebook, trying to entice her to do an interview with Bay Windows.
Their October 4 edition contains their own editor's reference to this Sept. 27 column, and letters responding to it, which also made their print edition. Hard to cover that up. (Yes, Bay Windows, we've preserved your online version of this too.) They also tried to scrub an earlier article, which we've saved.
Clearly, Bay Windows belatedly realized that they were on very shaky legal ground reprinting lies from QueerToday, and going after a minor child. And they still are on shaky legal ground.
They have tried to scrub from the web two articles where they piled on in the attack on this family, and even published the child's name, working with an accomplice blog, QueerToday. But MassResistance has saved these articles, and will preserve them for posterity. (They've told at least one person over the phone that they never published the Sept. 27 article!)
Here's the September 27 piece they don't want you to see (which appeared only online, not in their print edition): "Anti-gay activist's daughter allegedly in Laramie Project cast," by Ethan Jacobs, 9-27-07, ejacobs@baywindows.com. Mr. Jacobs secretly contacted the child via Facebook, trying to entice her to do an interview with Bay Windows.
Their October 4 edition contains their own editor's reference to this Sept. 27 column, and letters responding to it, which also made their print edition. Hard to cover that up. (Yes, Bay Windows, we've preserved your online version of this too.) They also tried to scrub an earlier article, which we've saved.
Clearly, Bay Windows belatedly realized that they were on very shaky legal ground reprinting lies from QueerToday, and going after a minor child. And they still are on shaky legal ground.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Acton-Boxborough Regional H.S. Directs Kids to Sacrilegious Filth
If anyone still doubts the anti-Christian character and pure evil of the radical homosexual movement, they need to read the posting, "Queering Christ" [reprinted below] from the filth blog, QueerToday. This blog and its activists are currently in touch with Acton-Boxborough High School students because of "The Laramie Project" production there this week.
Want proof? The MatthewShepard.org web site, where the students are sent by the play, has a teen-friendly site called "Matthew's Place," where a "resources" page for Massachusetts goes right to BAGLY (the "Boston Alliance of Gay Lesbian Bisexual & Transgender Youth). BAGLY's former office manager ("Mark" below) is the founder and editor of QueerToday. One of its blogger/commenters ("Trevor" below) is BAGLY's current office manager. BAGLY is in direct partnership with the Mass. Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and the homosexual clubs in our schools (GSAs), including Acton-Boxborough's, and puts on the queer/transgender high school prom at Boston City Hall each year. The director of BAGLY is a "male-to-female transsexual" who lectures children all over the state on the mysteries of "gender identity" and "sex changes." Bear in mind that people working in these "GLBT teen centers" do not undergo criminal record checks, but are all dealing with young teens (with the support of your local schools).
Back to the filth from QueerToday: We posted an excerpt and link to this vile sacrilege a little while back ("The Laramie Project and Hating Jesus", 10-1-07). Maybe it was missed?
Want proof? The MatthewShepard.org web site, where the students are sent by the play, has a teen-friendly site called "Matthew's Place," where a "resources" page for Massachusetts goes right to BAGLY (the "Boston Alliance of Gay Lesbian Bisexual & Transgender Youth). BAGLY's former office manager ("Mark" below) is the founder and editor of QueerToday. One of its blogger/commenters ("Trevor" below) is BAGLY's current office manager. BAGLY is in direct partnership with the Mass. Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and the homosexual clubs in our schools (GSAs), including Acton-Boxborough's, and puts on the queer/transgender high school prom at Boston City Hall each year. The director of BAGLY is a "male-to-female transsexual" who lectures children all over the state on the mysteries of "gender identity" and "sex changes." Bear in mind that people working in these "GLBT teen centers" do not undergo criminal record checks, but are all dealing with young teens (with the support of your local schools).
Back to the filth from QueerToday: We posted an excerpt and link to this vile sacrilege a little while back ("The Laramie Project and Hating Jesus", 10-1-07). Maybe it was missed?
Queering Christ [from QueerToday, 10-1-07]
Currently I am enrolled at a pretty
"My technique of meditative prayer was to envision Christ with me and experience him as a lover. Scott Haleman, Betty Dodson, and Joe Kramer argue that masturbation can be spiritual and can become a form of transcendental meditation. Masturbation can harness fantasies and sexual energy. When prolonged, it can stimulate and extend pleasure. When fantasies are focused into making love with Christ, the experience opens itself to a fundamental and profound consciousness of God. My visualizations of Jesus were certainly explicit, erotically envisioning various forms of making love to Jesus the Christ. I had sexual intercourse with Jesus. Sometimes he was the top, and sometimes he was the bottom. My relationship with Christ was mutual and deep."
Trevor Wright said...
jesus loves me, but I still make him wear a condome.... love the post jason! (10-1-07)
Paul Jamieson said...
Our prayers are with you at this difficult time. (10-2-07)
Mark D. Snyder said...
lol Jason, the right-wingers are loving your post.
Can agnostics like me still masturbate over Jesus? Hehe (10-2-07)
jason lydon said...
they sure are... but they think i'm part of the metropolitan community church, but at this point i'm still a unitarian universalist. maybe i'll convert. it is pretty awesome, regardless of your faith, to think of a gorgeous jesus when masturbating. have fun queering christ (i also bet one could queer mary the mother of jesus or mary magdalene or any other gendered person in the hebrew or christian bible, just to make queering christianity fun for everyone) (10-2-07)
Fire Crotch said...
I am also reading a radical jesus book for my African American Biblical hermeneutics class called "The Politics of Jesus: Rediscovering the true revolutionary nature of Jesus' teachings and how they have been corrupted. Its very very awesome. I also recommend for a woman's erotic christ, Journeys By Heart: A Christology of Erotic Power by Rita Nakashima Brock...but i have only read some of that. nice post, Jason! I wanna chat semenary with you...oops, I mean seminary (10-3-07)
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Why the Focus on Homosexuality?
Another excellent piece by Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America, "Homosexuality: What's all the fuss?" (WorldNetDaily, 11-1-07). He addresses one of the most annoying taunts thrown our way: Aren't you hyperfocused on homosexuality? But most of us fighting this battle never gave homosexuality much thought prior to November 2003. But then, crazy judges in Massachusetts pushed our faces into the poop, forced us to lick and declare it good. Since then, as Barber says, "we find ourselves – back against the ropes – in a fight we did not pick, struggling in a culture war we did not ask for." Excerpt:
... A particularly heavy focus on the sin of homosexuality by "Christians as a whole" is not at all gratuitous. There is such emphasis, not because we intentionally and specifically chose to target this particular sin, but rather, because strident moral relativists demand that, in contrast to the other sins you address, the sin of homosexuality not only be "tolerated," but celebrated. That's what the euphemistic slogan "celebrate diversity" supposes.
Sexual relativists are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual behaviors – by force of law – through federal edicts such as "hate crimes" legislation and the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).
Unlike the sin of homosexuality, the other sins you cite – the sins of adultery, fornication, racism, pride, jealousy, selfish ambition and drunkenness – do not have the benefit of a tremendously powerful and prosperous lobby that is blindly supported by people in positions of political influence, and other leftists in media and elsewhere who have been duped by the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of "tolerance" and "diversity."
Proponents, practitioners and enablers of homosexual sin demand that we all renounce God's express condemnation of such conduct and embrace this spiritually and physically destructive behavior as virtuous – as a wholly equal, alternative sexual "orientation." ... Read more.
... A particularly heavy focus on the sin of homosexuality by "Christians as a whole" is not at all gratuitous. There is such emphasis, not because we intentionally and specifically chose to target this particular sin, but rather, because strident moral relativists demand that, in contrast to the other sins you address, the sin of homosexuality not only be "tolerated," but celebrated. That's what the euphemistic slogan "celebrate diversity" supposes.
Sexual relativists are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual behaviors – by force of law – through federal edicts such as "hate crimes" legislation and the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).
Unlike the sin of homosexuality, the other sins you cite – the sins of adultery, fornication, racism, pride, jealousy, selfish ambition and drunkenness – do not have the benefit of a tremendously powerful and prosperous lobby that is blindly supported by people in positions of political influence, and other leftists in media and elsewhere who have been duped by the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of "tolerance" and "diversity."
Proponents, practitioners and enablers of homosexual sin demand that we all renounce God's express condemnation of such conduct and embrace this spiritually and physically destructive behavior as virtuous – as a wholly equal, alternative sexual "orientation." ... Read more.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
"Hate" Never Defined
As we watch the out-of-control homosexual activists in Massachusetts, we still wonder how they can get away with throwing the "hater" and "bigot" labels around so freely, never being called to define the terms. And how can the American people be so gullible? Scott Lively has a good article on DefendTheFamily on this name-calling tactic:
Is Hating "Haters" Hateful?
... the “gay agenda” is to stop everyone from following the Bible regarding sexual matters. It is, after all, their stated goal to “stamp out homophobia.” No more religious freedom. It’s also to suppress scientific research that has reached conclusions they don’t like, especially if it helps people to change their homosexual orientation back to a heterosexual one (ask the doctors and scientists at narth.com what they’ve had to endure). If it discourages homosexuality, even by implication, it’s homophobic and can‘t be used.
There’s a queer reasoning behind all of this. Homosexuals call me names like bigot and homophobe, condemn my religion, mock my rational conclusions about social issues, impugn my motives, display intense hostility toward my actions, and curse my very existence, all under the justification that I’m a “hater.” But if I’m a “hater” for civilly opposing what they do, why aren’t they haters for uncivilly opposing what I do? Such a double standard, in the context of a public debate on “civil rights,” is not just hypocritical, it is surreal.
I admit I have some hate. I hate watching people kill themselves with preventable diseases like AIDS. I hate seeing children being steered toward unhealthy lifestyles. I hate having my pro-family views distorted by dishonest journalists, politicians and academics. And I hate seeing my God being treated like a homophobe for what He teaches in His Bible....
Is Hating "Haters" Hateful?
... the “gay agenda” is to stop everyone from following the Bible regarding sexual matters. It is, after all, their stated goal to “stamp out homophobia.” No more religious freedom. It’s also to suppress scientific research that has reached conclusions they don’t like, especially if it helps people to change their homosexual orientation back to a heterosexual one (ask the doctors and scientists at narth.com what they’ve had to endure). If it discourages homosexuality, even by implication, it’s homophobic and can‘t be used.
There’s a queer reasoning behind all of this. Homosexuals call me names like bigot and homophobe, condemn my religion, mock my rational conclusions about social issues, impugn my motives, display intense hostility toward my actions, and curse my very existence, all under the justification that I’m a “hater.” But if I’m a “hater” for civilly opposing what they do, why aren’t they haters for uncivilly opposing what I do? Such a double standard, in the context of a public debate on “civil rights,” is not just hypocritical, it is surreal.
I admit I have some hate. I hate watching people kill themselves with preventable diseases like AIDS. I hate seeing children being steered toward unhealthy lifestyles. I hate having my pro-family views distorted by dishonest journalists, politicians and academics. And I hate seeing my God being treated like a homophobe for what He teaches in His Bible....
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Worcester Telegram and Gazette's Reporter Discredited at Cirignano Trial
This goes way beyond questions of "media bias". It goes directly to whether a newspaper can be trusted to report facts. The Worcester Telegram and Gazette was worried at Larry Cirignano's trial last week that their reporter's (and therefore, newspaper's) objectivity would be called into question. Their attorney tried to prevent their reporter from being called to the stand.
Ciriginano was found NOT GUILTY by a jury yesterday, on the trumped-up charges that he "assaulted" a pro-homosexual agitator at a marriage amendment rally last December. (See today's Worcester T+G, "Jury finds tripping, not a push; Rally leader found not guilty of assault.")
The ACLU, the Worcester Police, the Worcester D.A., and the Telegram and Gazette must all be in a state of shock.
We knew the Telegram and Gazette's report following the incident was outrageous. Now court testimony has caused a big problem for that newspaper and its reporter, Richard Nangle. Read these accounts and make up your own mind...
See MassResistance coverage of Larry Cirignano's trial (10-22-07).
... Richard Nangle, a reporter for the Worcester Telegram and Gazette, had written a hostile first-person account of the incident which was published in a number of newspapers. He told the court he saw someone push Loy to the ground, saying that he was 6-8 feet from Loy at the time. But he wasn't able to identify himself in any of the several photos taken at the time, which covered the entire crowd and showed every person....
... after several witnesses testified, it became clear that Loy had not been pushed by Larry at all. Instead, Loy had tripped over the foot of a thirteen-year-old girl standing in the crowd, after Larry had walked away. The girl testified, her mother testified, another girl standing nearby testified, and several others. Even the prosecutor was forced to give up that argument. Even Loy's claim that she had hit her head on the ground was debunked by witnesses who testified they saw her land on her buttocks, break her fall with her hand, look around for a second, and then l lie down in a fetal position and scream.
See Bay Windows, Woman testifies that Catholic Citizenship leader assaulted her (10-18-07).
The judge also heard a request by Neil McGaraghan, an attorney for the Telegram and Gazette, that Nangle not be forced to testify at the trial. Nangle was subpoenaed to testify by Early’s office. McGaraghan argued that there were other eyewitnesses to the incident and that forcing Nangle to testify could harm his credibility as an impartial reporter, particularly if on cross-examination he was asked his personal opinion about the subject of the VoteOnMarriage rally, same-sex marriage.“You then without a doubt have a supposedly neutral reporter having to reveal private feelings about the matter,” said McGaraghan. (During his testimony, Nangle was not asked about his personal beliefs about civil marriage rights.) Quinlan responded that the prosecution wanted to call Nangle as a witness both because he was allegedly in closest proximity among all the eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and because he is the only eyewitness not affiliated either with Loy or with Cirignano.On the second day of the trial Despotopulos denied the Telegram and Gazette’s motion to quash the subpoena against Nangle.
See Nangle's original report in the Worcester Telegram and Gazette (12-17-06).
Tempers boiled over at an anti-gay marriage rally yesterday when the executive director of the Boston-based Catholic Citizenship emerged from behind a lectern outside City Hall, rushed toward a female counter-demonstrator, and pushed her to the ground.Sarah Loy, 27, of Worcester was holding a sign in defense of same-sex marriage amid a sea of green "Let the People Vote" signs when Larry Cirignano of Canton, who heads the Catholic Citizenship group, ran into the crowd, grabbed her by both shoulders and told her, "You need to get out. You need to get out of here right now." Mr. Cirignano then pushed her to the ground, her head slamming against the concrete sidewalk. "It was definitely assault and battery," said Ronal C. Madnick, director of the Worcester County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts.... Counter-demonstrators have been showing up at anti-gay marriage rallies in communities across the state in recent days, chanting and trying to drown out speakers.... [See entire story...]
Ciriginano was found NOT GUILTY by a jury yesterday, on the trumped-up charges that he "assaulted" a pro-homosexual agitator at a marriage amendment rally last December. (See today's Worcester T+G, "Jury finds tripping, not a push; Rally leader found not guilty of assault.")
The ACLU, the Worcester Police, the Worcester D.A., and the Telegram and Gazette must all be in a state of shock.
We knew the Telegram and Gazette's report following the incident was outrageous. Now court testimony has caused a big problem for that newspaper and its reporter, Richard Nangle. Read these accounts and make up your own mind...
See MassResistance coverage of Larry Cirignano's trial (10-22-07).
... Richard Nangle, a reporter for the Worcester Telegram and Gazette, had written a hostile first-person account of the incident which was published in a number of newspapers. He told the court he saw someone push Loy to the ground, saying that he was 6-8 feet from Loy at the time. But he wasn't able to identify himself in any of the several photos taken at the time, which covered the entire crowd and showed every person....
... after several witnesses testified, it became clear that Loy had not been pushed by Larry at all. Instead, Loy had tripped over the foot of a thirteen-year-old girl standing in the crowd, after Larry had walked away. The girl testified, her mother testified, another girl standing nearby testified, and several others. Even the prosecutor was forced to give up that argument. Even Loy's claim that she had hit her head on the ground was debunked by witnesses who testified they saw her land on her buttocks, break her fall with her hand, look around for a second, and then l lie down in a fetal position and scream.
See Bay Windows, Woman testifies that Catholic Citizenship leader assaulted her (10-18-07).
The judge also heard a request by Neil McGaraghan, an attorney for the Telegram and Gazette, that Nangle not be forced to testify at the trial. Nangle was subpoenaed to testify by Early’s office. McGaraghan argued that there were other eyewitnesses to the incident and that forcing Nangle to testify could harm his credibility as an impartial reporter, particularly if on cross-examination he was asked his personal opinion about the subject of the VoteOnMarriage rally, same-sex marriage.“You then without a doubt have a supposedly neutral reporter having to reveal private feelings about the matter,” said McGaraghan. (During his testimony, Nangle was not asked about his personal beliefs about civil marriage rights.) Quinlan responded that the prosecution wanted to call Nangle as a witness both because he was allegedly in closest proximity among all the eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and because he is the only eyewitness not affiliated either with Loy or with Cirignano.On the second day of the trial Despotopulos denied the Telegram and Gazette’s motion to quash the subpoena against Nangle.
See Nangle's original report in the Worcester Telegram and Gazette (12-17-06).
Tempers boiled over at an anti-gay marriage rally yesterday when the executive director of the Boston-based Catholic Citizenship emerged from behind a lectern outside City Hall, rushed toward a female counter-demonstrator, and pushed her to the ground.Sarah Loy, 27, of Worcester was holding a sign in defense of same-sex marriage amid a sea of green "Let the People Vote" signs when Larry Cirignano of Canton, who heads the Catholic Citizenship group, ran into the crowd, grabbed her by both shoulders and told her, "You need to get out. You need to get out of here right now." Mr. Cirignano then pushed her to the ground, her head slamming against the concrete sidewalk. "It was definitely assault and battery," said Ronal C. Madnick, director of the Worcester County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts.... Counter-demonstrators have been showing up at anti-gay marriage rallies in communities across the state in recent days, chanting and trying to drown out speakers.... [See entire story...]
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
ACLU Laying Traps in Massachusetts
Left: Anthony Romero, national executive director of the ACLU, is speaking in Lowell and Concord today. [photo: aclu.org]The Larry Cirignano case is just one example of the ACLU's nefarious activities in Massachusetts. They're doing what they can to entrap conservative, pro-family leaders and tie us up in lawsuits. It's no accident that the woman behind the charges against Cirignano is on the board of the Mass. ACLU. And interesting that their national director, Anthony D. Romero, is in town today pushing his book in Lowell and Concord.
Another ACLU entrapment effort seemed to be underway just a few weeks ago. When parents in the Acton-Boxborough High School district planned a forum to expose the content and message of the fall play, "The Laramie Project " (set for early November run), they asked MassResistance for help. Sure enough, a week or so prior to the forum on Oct. 3, a "college student from Emerson" called the MassResistance office to ask about the forum, and said she wanted to tape it because she was "doing a research project on the ex-homosexual movement," and was especially interested in ex-homosexual Stephen Bennett's participation in the event. (Footnote: Bennett's vehicle was intentionally rammed by a hit-and-run driver on his way to the event, and could not participate.)
We told this young woman that she was certainly welcome to attend, but that it didn't make sense for her to do her own video of the event, since we had several people lined up to do that. She would be able to get a copy after the event, we told her, and we didn't want a lot of disruption with cameras. She kept prodding. "It's a public meeting, so I should be able to tape." We sensed some trap, and asked her how she heard of the event and if she was connected to a certain activist group (which we knew was closely connected to Emerson).
Apparently, this was part of an ACLU attempt to stir up trouble. Just as they did in Worcester. Suspected ACLU activists were observed in the audience on Oct. 3, and a news channel told us the ACLU was planning to be at the forum.
Our message to the ACLU: The "Laramie Project" Forum is about to be broadcast on Acton cable TV, probably starting Thursday night. Get your VCRs ready. Or contact the MassResistance office, and you can purchase a tape. But ACLU members won't get the friend's discount. (Can we be charged with something for that???)
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
"Bigot" Defined
We've noticed an awful lot of name calling directed towards MassResistance lately. Never any serious dispute of the facts or references we cite, or photographic evidence we present. All that's left to the Left is name calling! So we thought we'd do a little dictionary check on one of their favorites, bigot:
"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.
"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.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
All Towns Should End Ties to "No Place for Hate"
We're glad to see that Watertown has severed its ties with the hate group, "No Place for Hate." This is an intolerant organization which over and over has shown its bias and bigotry towards people who hold traditional faith and values.The Watertown controversy picked up steam when the Anti-Defamation League's denial of the Armenian genocide was made public by a concerned citizen. How could the Boston Globe join in denying that genocide? They were forced to make critical comments about the ADL! It would be too much to hope the Globe would take its blinders off, and recognize ADL/No Place for Hate's other denials regarding the abortion genocide, the health risks of homosexuality, the rights of parents to the moral education of their own children, etc. See our earlier reports on "No Place for Hate":
David Parker's Civil Disobedience the Only Way He Could Be Heard (5-12-05)
Pink Triangles and Police Lists in Bedford (6-11-05)
Lexington Radicals Still Calling Names (7-3-05)
Watertown Declares Itself "Place for Hate" -- of Traditional Values (5-23-07)
"No Place for Hate" Sponsor ADL Denies Holocausts (8-3-07)
No Place for Hate Now in Acton (8-6-07)
Recent stories in the Boston Globe:
Town ends ties with No Place for Hate (8-15-07)
We wonder what the "good works" are supposedly done by the group? "Diversity days"?
Pressure mounting on ADL program; Armenian groups expand initiative (8-16-07)
"The controversy over No Place For Hate, a national program that had encountered no controversy until now, centers on what critics say is the ADL's refusal to acknowledge the genocide."
There has been controversy over this program before (see our reports above); the Globe just chose not to cover it, since it was over their pet project, pushing homosexuality.
". . . in 1999 [the ADL] it launched the No Place For Hate program. Under the program, communities organize diversity days and other events focused on challenging bigotry, and after a year they receive placards to be posted in public, declaring the community as "No Place For Hate."
Now what "bigotry" would those "diversity days" have in mind?
Local chapter breaks with ADL position; Armenian genocide at issue (8-17-07)
A painful truth (8-18-07) By Rachel Kaprielian [State Rep., Watertown] and Alan Dershowitz
ADL local leader fired on Armenian issue; Genocide question sparked bitter debate (8-19-07)
2 members of regional ADL board quit (8-19-07)
Jewish groups pressure the ADL (8-21-07)
Friday, August 17, 2007
Quebec Govt Threatens to Take Children from Mennonite Parents
Read this news from Canada, and ask how long it will be before Massachusetts authorities begin taking children away from their "conservative Christian" or "homophobic" parents. The First Circuit Federal Court has already ruled that parents can be denied their right to determine the moral and religious education of their own children, and that their children must be indoctrinated that homosexuality and transgenderism are normal, healthy, and equal to heterosexuality. The Mass. Department of Education and local school districts have long violated existing Massachusetts law requiring parental notification and opt-out privilege on issues of human sexuality.
Whether you call this Leftist indoctrination, atheistic fascism, anti-Creationist fascism, or homofascism, the end result is the same: Children will soon belong to the state, not to their parents.
Mennonites threaten to abandon Quebec
The province insists the group's children must go to a sanctioned school. Leaders say they'll leave the province rather than conform
CanWest News Service, 8-16-07
They have integrated into Quebec society, found jobs, made friends and learned French. But members of Quebec's only Mennonite community say they'll move out of the province before they'll send their children to government-approved schools. It's a question of religious intolerance, said Ronald Goossen, who in the early 1990s was among the first Mennonites from Manitoba to move to this sleepy town about 100 kilometres east of Montreal. "It's kind of sad because we enjoy the community, we have friends and we have good rapport with our neighbours.
"But when they threaten to take our children and put them in foster homes, that's beyond what we can accept," said Goossen, 56. Parents were warned they'll face legal proceedings if their children aren't enrolled in sanctioned schools this fall. That could lead to children being taken from families, Goossen said. He said about 30 members of the 15-family community -- couples with their school-aged children -- will have to move before school starts. The others will follow.
. . . Problems arise because the teacher is not certified and the province's official curriculum is not being taught, say education officials. [The official curriculum teaches anti-Christian attitudes and immorality antithetical to the Mennonite way of life.] "To do that, we would have to send teachers to schools we don't want to send our children to," Goossen said. "We don't agree with the emphasis on evolution, which we consider false; we don't like the morality standards; and we don't like the acceptance of alternative lifestyles," he said . . .
Whether you call this Leftist indoctrination, atheistic fascism, anti-Creationist fascism, or homofascism, the end result is the same: Children will soon belong to the state, not to their parents.
Mennonites threaten to abandon Quebec
The province insists the group's children must go to a sanctioned school. Leaders say they'll leave the province rather than conform
CanWest News Service, 8-16-07
They have integrated into Quebec society, found jobs, made friends and learned French. But members of Quebec's only Mennonite community say they'll move out of the province before they'll send their children to government-approved schools. It's a question of religious intolerance, said Ronald Goossen, who in the early 1990s was among the first Mennonites from Manitoba to move to this sleepy town about 100 kilometres east of Montreal. "It's kind of sad because we enjoy the community, we have friends and we have good rapport with our neighbours.
"But when they threaten to take our children and put them in foster homes, that's beyond what we can accept," said Goossen, 56. Parents were warned they'll face legal proceedings if their children aren't enrolled in sanctioned schools this fall. That could lead to children being taken from families, Goossen said. He said about 30 members of the 15-family community -- couples with their school-aged children -- will have to move before school starts. The others will follow.
. . . Problems arise because the teacher is not certified and the province's official curriculum is not being taught, say education officials. [The official curriculum teaches anti-Christian attitudes and immorality antithetical to the Mennonite way of life.] "To do that, we would have to send teachers to schools we don't want to send our children to," Goossen said. "We don't agree with the emphasis on evolution, which we consider false; we don't like the morality standards; and we don't like the acceptance of alternative lifestyles," he said . . .
Monday, July 02, 2007
Gregg Jackson on Homofascism in Massachusetts
Gregg Jackson, talk show host on WRKO's "Pundit Review" (AM680), just published this column on the homofascist victory in Massachusetts. June 14 confirmed of the total corruption of the Massaachusetts Legislature. Whether one supported the weak marriage amendment voted on that day or not, 3/4 of our Legislators have betrayed Christian morality and common sense.
"Tyranny Rears Its Head: In the Birthplace of Liberty Gay Bullies Prove They Rule The Puritan State"
GrassTopsUSA Guest Commentary
By Gregg Jackson (7-2-07)
"Tyranny Rears Its Head: In the Birthplace of Liberty Gay Bullies Prove They Rule The Puritan State"
GrassTopsUSA Guest Commentary
By Gregg Jackson (7-2-07)
... The legislature's tyranny is more outrageous and destructive than what the colonists faced. Twenty days before July 4, 2007 your Cradle of Liberty became, officially, the Test Tube of Totalitarianism. The American Revolution began here in a revolt against a tyrannical monarchy. But now a New American Revolution has begun in the land of the Minutemen. The revolt against America's ultimate "founding Father," the Creator referenced throughout the Declaration of Independence occurred 36 hours before Fathers Day. Is that coincidence or design? Is it coincidence that it happened 20 days before the annual celebration of the birth of Democracy? Is it coincidence that just before the 4th of July, the city once called "The New Jerusalem" has become what Massachusetts' founders would call "The New Sodom?" ...
Puritan State lawmakers legalized lawlessness, brash rebellion against the man on whom Western Civilization bases time. Contrary to liberal theologians' repeated twisting of Scripture, Jesus never condoned homosexuality, as they do. Homosexuals are not exempt from the love of Jesus, but homosexual marriage mocks Him, God's law and all those who have died defending God's nation in the modern world.
The Cradle of Liberty is now the Cradle of American Fascism. Persecution of Christians is the next step. People who believe the Bible and don't accept the doctrine that homosexuality is normal and natural began years ago. Brian Camenker, the main Massachusetts critic of the gay agenda, has been viciously persecuted for years. His radio program was taken off the air a few weeks before the legislature's tyrannical vote. ... Funny. That's exactly what the communists do when they takeover a country: silence critics....
Friday, June 29, 2007
Mass. House of Reps in May 2004: No Vote Will Overturn Marriage Ruling
Did you get that? The Massachusetts House of Representatives, under Tom Finneran's leadership, issued a proclamation on May 17, 2004 PLEDGING NO VOTE WOULD OVERTURN THE GOODRIDGE SODOMY "MARRIAGE" RULING. This proclamation specifically congratulated one of the most radical homosexual activists in the state on the occasion of his "wedding". And no, this was not an occasion for a tongue-in-cheek pronouncement.
"What the SJC has granted, let no vote put asunder."
(This assumes that columnist Margery Eagan was reporting accurately --a bit risky.)
"What the SJC has granted, let no vote put asunder."
(This assumes that columnist Margery Eagan was reporting accurately --a bit risky.)
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Finneran-Lang-Eagan Axis of Evil
Came across an amazing column by one of our least favorites, the lisping Margery Eagan. This lovely little piece from May 18, 2004, easily missed in the surreal events surrounding the total breakdown of constitutional government in Massachusetts -- brings together convicted felon/former House Speaker Tom Finneran, Holocaust perverter/KnowThyNeighbor intimidator-in-chief Tom Lang, and Mizz Eagan, Boston Herald columnist. A true rogue's gallery. The column brings home the extent of the conspiracy pushing sodomy "marriage". Mr. Speaker Finneran -- supposedly totally against this travesty -- was ready and eager to congratulate Lang and his "husband" on their "wedding".How long have we heard over and over that Finneran opposed "gay marriage"? But what did he really do to halt it in 2004? He could have led the Legislature to defy the SJC ruling (just as Gov. Romney could have done with his Executive branch). But he did NOTHING. Stayed behind closed doors and pretended to be working for a constitutional amendment. If you review all the stories from November 2003 through May 2004, you'll be struck by how many times "Finneran had no comment". Reading this column, we realize he was just as much a turncoat as the recent legislators who voted against marriage.
Lang's "wedding" was one of the first after the phony, illegal "gay marriages" began. He married his lovely bride -- oops, "husband" -- Alex, in a rose-bedecked church in Manchester-By-The-Sea. Eagan was apparently a guest of the two grooms. And Finneran issued a proclamation celebrating this sanctification of sodomy. The "husbands" seem to be very wealthy and well-connected, the event complete with bejeweled guests, opera singers, and a mansion to go home to. (Has Eagan returned for a party recently?)
Within two years of his glorious "wedding", Lang went on to publish the names of all who signed the VoteOnMarriage referendum petition on his KnowThyNeighbor site, and become a leading spewer of heterophobic hate speech. Watch him and his friends in this video (he's the chubby guy with glasses), revealing his intention to shut down any speech opposing his. And now how amazing is it that both Eagan and Finneran host talk radio shows? (This used to be the only outlet for conservatives in this state; now station managements are giving it over to the leftists.) From Eagan's column,"Same-Sex Marriage: Ordinary ceremony turns unique" (Boston Herald, 5-18-04).
... Five minutes after Alexander Westerhoff and Thomas Lang, in tails and tux, walked down a white-carpeted aisle here last night, their wedding became not about same-sex or any sex, but about two people promising their lives to each other.
In many respects this wedding is "like any wedding," said officiating minister the Rev. Peter J. Gomes of Harvard University . "Preservice jitters . . . anxiety . . . confusion," he said. "And so we celebrate the ordinariness of the occasion."
But Gomes also said there's "something quite unique and special" happening in this small chapel.
You expected Gomes then to speak of history: Yesterday, for the first time, homosexual couples could wed in Massachusetts . Before yesterday this union would have been illegal. Instead, Gomes referred to the two men before him as "unique" in their love. Men who put "16 years' worth of thought and care and consideration" into getting married.
And so it was in many ways a traditional marriage. Each pew a garland of baby roses. Best man Alex Filias handing over the rings. Traditional vows: "I give you this ring as a symbol of my promise," said Westerhoff. "All that I am is yours, as long as we both shall live," said Lang.
Here's what was different: As the couples joined hands, Gomes pronounced them, not man and wife, but "partners for life" and "truly married in the sight of God and man." Lang and Westerhoff kissed twice - very quickly - then they received a proclamation of congratulations from the Massachusetts House of Representatives, signed by Speaker Thomas Finneran, who has long opposed gay marriage. It read: "What the SJC has granted, let no vote put asunder."
... last night in Manchester-by-the-Sea, about 100 guests - men in black ties and women in bejeweled gowns - celebrated their marriage with them. Singers from the Boston Lyric Opera sang arias by Puccini and Lehar. Lang and Westerhoff marched out of the church to a gospel rendition of "Oh, Happy Day," sung by the red-robed Majestic Ensemble. Westerhoff was occasionally in tears as the wedding party adjourned to the massive home the couple just built together.
Missing from the party, however, was Alex's mother, who disowned him, the couple said, after their Vermont civil union....
Sunday, June 24, 2007
How Gill Foundation Buys Votes
More on the corruption of the Massachusetts Legislature by homofascist money. We've posted on these two articles before, but it's time to review them. First, the piece in Atlantic Monthly, "They Won't Know What Hit Them," on the Gill Foundation's tactics for taking over state legislatures. Note that Patrick Guerriero is clearly in charge. In Iowa:
Over the summer, [pro-family incumbent who lost] Carroll’s opponent started receiving checks from across the country—significant sums for a statehouse race, though none so large as to arouse suspicion (the gifts topped out at $1,000). Because they came from individuals and not from organizations, nothing identified the money as being “gay,” or even coordinated. Only a very astute political operative would have spotted the unusual number of out-of-state donors and pondered their interest in an obscure midwestern race. And only someone truly versed in the world of gay causes would have noticed a $1,000 contribution from Denver, Colorado, and been aware that its source, Tim Gill, is the country’s biggest gay donor, and the nexus of an aggressive new force in national politics.
Scrolling through the thirty-two-page roster of campaign contributors revealed plenty of $25 and $50 donations from nearby towns like Oskaloosa and New Sharon. But a $1,000 donation from California stood out on page 2, and, several pages later, so did another $1,000 from New York City. “I’ll be darned,” said Carroll. “That doesn’t make any sense.” As we kept scrolling, Carroll began reading aloud with mounting disbelief as the evidence passed before his eyes. “Denver … Dallas … Los Angeles … Malibu … there’s New York again … San Francisco! I can’t—I just cannot believe this,” he said, finally....
Gill’s decision to shift away from national politics seems dictated even more by his philosophy about how to engage most effectively in politics than by the mediocre gains chalked up during the Clinton years. “If your objective is to innovate and take risks, you move faster with a small group,” Gill’s political director, Guerriero, told me. “If Columbus had needed a conference call before setting sail for America, he’d still be at the dock.”...
One component of Gill’s strategy includes courting that element of the Republican Party that’s open to compromise, while at the same time making clear that gay bashing will now come at a price. “You have to create an atmosphere of fear and respect,” said Trimpa, “and set up the proper context for them to do the right thing.”
Also, National Review exposed the takeover of the Colorado state house as more of Gill's handiwork. (See "The Color Purple: how liberal millionaires are buying Colorado's politics" by John J. Miller.):
A large number of Republicans believe that their hard times ultimately come down to a single factor: money. "We haven't seen anything like this before," says Katy Atkinson, a longtime GOP consultant. "The money factor is absolutely enormous." ... Three millionaire liberals are working the state's electoral levers. "They're trying to buy the political structure of the state," says Governor Owens. "Everywhere we look, we see their money and their resources." The ringleader is Tim Gill, the founder of Quark, a software firm; over the last decade, he has donated tens of millions to gay and lesbian causes. ...
Two years ago, Ray Martinez learned firsthand what their money can do. He was a former police sergeant and a popular three-term mayor of Fort Collins. When a state senator retired in his district, he threw his hat in the ring. "We thought he would win easily," says [former Gov.] Owens. The district is home to about one-third more registered Republicans than Democrats. But then Colorado's liberal millionaires swooped in, bankrolling slash-and-burn ads about Martinez. Many of them aired in Denver's pricey TV market--an extravagance previously unheard of in state-senate races. "You know how you hear about elections that are bought? That's what happened to me--my opponent's election was bought," says Martinez. "My campaign cost about $350,000, and the other side spent as much as $1.7 million against me."
Over the summer, [pro-family incumbent who lost] Carroll’s opponent started receiving checks from across the country—significant sums for a statehouse race, though none so large as to arouse suspicion (the gifts topped out at $1,000). Because they came from individuals and not from organizations, nothing identified the money as being “gay,” or even coordinated. Only a very astute political operative would have spotted the unusual number of out-of-state donors and pondered their interest in an obscure midwestern race. And only someone truly versed in the world of gay causes would have noticed a $1,000 contribution from Denver, Colorado, and been aware that its source, Tim Gill, is the country’s biggest gay donor, and the nexus of an aggressive new force in national politics.
Scrolling through the thirty-two-page roster of campaign contributors revealed plenty of $25 and $50 donations from nearby towns like Oskaloosa and New Sharon. But a $1,000 donation from California stood out on page 2, and, several pages later, so did another $1,000 from New York City. “I’ll be darned,” said Carroll. “That doesn’t make any sense.” As we kept scrolling, Carroll began reading aloud with mounting disbelief as the evidence passed before his eyes. “Denver … Dallas … Los Angeles … Malibu … there’s New York again … San Francisco! I can’t—I just cannot believe this,” he said, finally....
Gill’s decision to shift away from national politics seems dictated even more by his philosophy about how to engage most effectively in politics than by the mediocre gains chalked up during the Clinton years. “If your objective is to innovate and take risks, you move faster with a small group,” Gill’s political director, Guerriero, told me. “If Columbus had needed a conference call before setting sail for America, he’d still be at the dock.”...
One component of Gill’s strategy includes courting that element of the Republican Party that’s open to compromise, while at the same time making clear that gay bashing will now come at a price. “You have to create an atmosphere of fear and respect,” said Trimpa, “and set up the proper context for them to do the right thing.”
Also, National Review exposed the takeover of the Colorado state house as more of Gill's handiwork. (See "The Color Purple: how liberal millionaires are buying Colorado's politics" by John J. Miller.):
A large number of Republicans believe that their hard times ultimately come down to a single factor: money. "We haven't seen anything like this before," says Katy Atkinson, a longtime GOP consultant. "The money factor is absolutely enormous." ... Three millionaire liberals are working the state's electoral levers. "They're trying to buy the political structure of the state," says Governor Owens. "Everywhere we look, we see their money and their resources." The ringleader is Tim Gill, the founder of Quark, a software firm; over the last decade, he has donated tens of millions to gay and lesbian causes. ...
Two years ago, Ray Martinez learned firsthand what their money can do. He was a former police sergeant and a popular three-term mayor of Fort Collins. When a state senator retired in his district, he threw his hat in the ring. "We thought he would win easily," says [former Gov.] Owens. The district is home to about one-third more registered Republicans than Democrats. But then Colorado's liberal millionaires swooped in, bankrolling slash-and-burn ads about Martinez. Many of them aired in Denver's pricey TV market--an extravagance previously unheard of in state-senate races. "You know how you hear about elections that are bought? That's what happened to me--my opponent's election was bought," says Martinez. "My campaign cost about $350,000, and the other side spent as much as $1.7 million against me."
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Coming Repeal of 1913 Law & Legalizing Still Illegal "Gay Marriage"
The leftist media campaign is on to dismiss the importance of the plot to overturn Massachusetts' "1913 law" regulating out-of-state couples marrying here. Ellen Goodman leads the way in her column, "The Vegas of same-sex marriage" (Boston Globe, 6-22-07).
A current law (dating from 1913) bars marriages here which would be illegal in a couple's (or eventually, a group's) home state. H1728 would overturn this law. We've been pointing out for some time that a companion bill filed by the homosexual lobby, H1710, would LEGALIZE still illegal HOMOSEXUAL "MARRIAGE". (The statutes never changed after the Goodridge ruling.)
There will probably be an attempt to rush these two bills through at midnight sometime in August when most normal people are vacationing. So stay in touch with the Judiciary Committee and watch the hearings schedule, especially for Bill H1710, which states:
Chapter 207 [marriage statutes] 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.
[Note the word "gender" is used instead of "sex". The GLBT groups behind this bill live in the Brave New World of "gender" fluidity, where biological sex and its implications are a politically incorrect concept.]
We suspect that the homosexual lobby realizes the news profile is a bit too elevated on the subject of the 1913 law, and they also want to deflect attention from this companion bill to legalize homosexual/transsexual/pansexual "marriage". Only MassResistance has pointed out that the H1710 even exists! The mainstream media have never mentioned it.
Back to the 1913 law: Marc Solomon of MassEquality was quoted (the day after the VoteOnMarriage amendment defeat) on how he is working with Governor Patrick and legislative leaders on the schedule to overturn it. The homosexual lobby now has more than 3/4 of the state legislators in their pocket. From the Boston Globe (6-16-07):
Proponents [of sodomy "marriage"] said they will also eventually look to open the door to couples from other states to marry in Massachusetts. Solomon said there is overwhelming support in the Legislature to repeal the 1913 law that prohibits couples from out of state from marrying in Massachusetts if the union would not be legal in their own state. "The next step is to sit down with legislative leaders and the governor's people and talk about when it makes sense to advance that piece of legislation," said Solomon, adding that there are no immediate plans for such a meeting.
But maybe they decided after this comment that they need to tamp down public scrutiny on this. So along comes Ellen Goodman. In her Boston Globe column yesterday, she made light of concerns that we'd become the "Las Vegas" of homosexual "marriage" if that law is overturned. She said that other states' bans on homosexual "marriage" will prevent its exportation from Massachusetts. If that's the case, why does the homosexual lobby here want so desperately to overturn the 1913 law? We know that the national homosexual groups (e.g., the Gill Foundation Action Fund) are pouring millions into Massachusetts. Why would they care about this 1913 law, except that they know what happens here will migrate to every other state? Goodman dishonestly writes:
But some are saying that if we overturn the 1913 law, the marrying hordes will come and go back home with a license and a lawsuit. Whether you like or loathe the idea, repealing the 1913 law isn't likely to have much effect. There are at least 44 states with no chance of recognition because of statutes or constitutional amendments against same-sex marriage. As Joanna Grossman, a family law professor at Hofstra who has written extensively on this subject, says, "There's nothing much one state can do to change the national landscape."...
"What makes marriage legally important is recognition by the jurisdiction in which you live," says Grossman. "There's the chance that couples would use this to litigate in a handful of other states like New York. There is the chance that, in a few states, a court might rule that even though we don't permit same-sex marriage, we recognize it if valid elsewhere." But by and large, "Massachusetts would suffer a brief economic boom and that would be the end of it."
Hmm. Doesn't sound like the end of it to us. What about the "full faith and credit" clause of the federal constitution? What about the hyper-aggressive advocacy groups like GLAD and ACLU, and their allies in the federal courts (the 9th District, for instance)? What about the the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law -- so some federal court will say we can't have some homosexuals allowed to marry, and some not?
A current law (dating from 1913) bars marriages here which would be illegal in a couple's (or eventually, a group's) home state. H1728 would overturn this law. We've been pointing out for some time that a companion bill filed by the homosexual lobby, H1710, would LEGALIZE still illegal HOMOSEXUAL "MARRIAGE". (The statutes never changed after the Goodridge ruling.)
There will probably be an attempt to rush these two bills through at midnight sometime in August when most normal people are vacationing. So stay in touch with the Judiciary Committee and watch the hearings schedule, especially for Bill H1710, which states:
Chapter 207 [marriage statutes] 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.
[Note the word "gender" is used instead of "sex". The GLBT groups behind this bill live in the Brave New World of "gender" fluidity, where biological sex and its implications are a politically incorrect concept.]
We suspect that the homosexual lobby realizes the news profile is a bit too elevated on the subject of the 1913 law, and they also want to deflect attention from this companion bill to legalize homosexual/transsexual/pansexual "marriage". Only MassResistance has pointed out that the H1710 even exists! The mainstream media have never mentioned it.
Back to the 1913 law: Marc Solomon of MassEquality was quoted (the day after the VoteOnMarriage amendment defeat) on how he is working with Governor Patrick and legislative leaders on the schedule to overturn it. The homosexual lobby now has more than 3/4 of the state legislators in their pocket. From the Boston Globe (6-16-07):
Proponents [of sodomy "marriage"] said they will also eventually look to open the door to couples from other states to marry in Massachusetts. Solomon said there is overwhelming support in the Legislature to repeal the 1913 law that prohibits couples from out of state from marrying in Massachusetts if the union would not be legal in their own state. "The next step is to sit down with legislative leaders and the governor's people and talk about when it makes sense to advance that piece of legislation," said Solomon, adding that there are no immediate plans for such a meeting.
But maybe they decided after this comment that they need to tamp down public scrutiny on this. So along comes Ellen Goodman. In her Boston Globe column yesterday, she made light of concerns that we'd become the "Las Vegas" of homosexual "marriage" if that law is overturned. She said that other states' bans on homosexual "marriage" will prevent its exportation from Massachusetts. If that's the case, why does the homosexual lobby here want so desperately to overturn the 1913 law? We know that the national homosexual groups (e.g., the Gill Foundation Action Fund) are pouring millions into Massachusetts. Why would they care about this 1913 law, except that they know what happens here will migrate to every other state? Goodman dishonestly writes:
But some are saying that if we overturn the 1913 law, the marrying hordes will come and go back home with a license and a lawsuit. Whether you like or loathe the idea, repealing the 1913 law isn't likely to have much effect. There are at least 44 states with no chance of recognition because of statutes or constitutional amendments against same-sex marriage. As Joanna Grossman, a family law professor at Hofstra who has written extensively on this subject, says, "There's nothing much one state can do to change the national landscape."...
"What makes marriage legally important is recognition by the jurisdiction in which you live," says Grossman. "There's the chance that couples would use this to litigate in a handful of other states like New York. There is the chance that, in a few states, a court might rule that even though we don't permit same-sex marriage, we recognize it if valid elsewhere." But by and large, "Massachusetts would suffer a brief economic boom and that would be the end of it."
Hmm. Doesn't sound like the end of it to us. What about the "full faith and credit" clause of the federal constitution? What about the hyper-aggressive advocacy groups like GLAD and ACLU, and their allies in the federal courts (the 9th District, for instance)? What about the the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law -- so some federal court will say we can't have some homosexuals allowed to marry, and some not?
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
"GLBT Holocaust Commemoration" Tonight
Tonight, the Boston Pride festival held its "GLBT Holocaust commemoration" as part of their week-long bacchanal. We doubt they were handing out copies of The Pink Swastika -- because it debunks the "gay" myth that homosexuals were a major target of the Nazis in the same manner as the Jews and Gypsies. The commemoration was at Boston's Holocaust Memorial near Faneuil Hall, close by lots of great bars. See Scott Lively & Kevin Abrams, The Pink Swastika (available online). From their Preface:
[The book contradicts] the common portrayal of homosexuals as exclusively victims of the Nazi regime. For this reason we were scrupulous in our documentation of homosexuals as the true inventors of Nazism and the guiding force behind many Nazi atrocities. We purposefully drew heavily upon homosexual writers and historians for our source material and used direct quotations from their writings whenever possible. The remainder of our sources are primarily mainstream historians of the Nazi era. ...
In the [pre-"politically-correct"] 1960s, Nazi homosexuality was so widely acknowledged in America (at least among the “social elites”) that the portrayal of Nazi thugs as homosexual was a frequent occurrence in Hollywood movies. One of the best examples is in Exodus (United Artists, 1960), the film adaptation of the Leon Uris novel about the creation of the State of Israel after World War II. In the film, actor Sal Mineo, playing a young man attempting to join the Irgun (the Jewish underground movement), fails to convince Irgun leaders that he is a genuine Nazi concentration camp survivor. Finally they are convinced — only when he breaks down and confesses that the Nazi guards “used me as a woman.” To the Irgun, this was definitive proof that he had been a Nazi prisoner.
Allen Ginsberg, the homosexual “beat” poet was asked by a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1966 (during an obscenity trial related to the book Naked Lunch, by William Borroughs) whether at “some time in the future there will be a political party, for instance, made up of homosexuals.” Ginsberg replied, saying “this has already happened in a sense -- or of sex perverts -- and we can point to Hitler, Germany under Hitler” (The New York Times, August 10, 1997).
These are but two examples which reveal the extent to which homosexuality was openly associated with Nazism in the past.
Friday, May 25, 2007
The End of Free Speech in Britain
We recently received the email below from an oppressed citizen, discriminated against on the basis of his traditional values. Now whether or not you think the language is a bit raw, we believe people should be allowed to so express themselves! And we're printing the comment as a little exercise in free speech. If you lived in Britain or Canada, where NO speech disapproving of homosexuality is allowed, you'd be frustrated too.
Comments:
I wish a group such as yours could exist here in the UK, where any dissent is prosecuted as a "hate crime" with NO DEFENCE PERMITTED, and where, since April it has been illegal NOT to indoctrinate children - even toddlers - with disgusting homosexual propaganda.
Putting your (censored) in someone's (censored) is NOT sex. It's masturbation. It's no different to putting it in a farmyard manure heap. It does retard emotional development though, and that's what those in power really want, a population of immature pansies incapable of resisting attempts to control our every thought, word and deed.
For the sake of America you MUST keep up the fight, and you MUST win. I wish you every success.
- Barney
And that reminded us of a much more refined (but related) recent posting at Defend the Family:
"Requiem for the Magna Carta"
Scott Lively, J.D., ThD.
On June 15, 1215, an intrepid group of English lords stood on the field of Runnymede and faced down the leviathan of arbitrary governmental power, represented at that moment by the heavy-handed King John. They called the list of concessions which they extracted from him that day the Magna Carta Libertatum, and this "Great Charter of Freedoms" has served as a mighty foundational pillar of constitutional law and human rights law for nearly 800 years.
From the Magna Carta have come such legal essentials to democracy as the right of habeas corpus (clauses 36, 38-40) and the right to due process of law (clause 29). But the clause to which the barons gave preeminence, placing it first in the list, was the one which provided that "the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired."
On March 21, 2007, another group of English lords, those seated in the upper house of the English Parliament, dealt the death blow to that great clause, which has protected not only the integrity of the English Church, but the notion that the church can stand as a moral authority independent of a nation's ever-changing social policies and political currents. Ironically, this long-standing freedom was cancelled by the approval of the Sexual Orientation Regulations of the Equality Act, a document which has all the appearance of a human rights instrument. In its implementation, however, this set of rules will have the effect of (among other things) prohibiting private Christian schools throughout the United Kingdom from teaching students the Biblical position that homosexual sexual behavior is morally wrong, and that it violates the evident heterosexual design of the human body.... Read more...
Comments:
I wish a group such as yours could exist here in the UK, where any dissent is prosecuted as a "hate crime" with NO DEFENCE PERMITTED, and where, since April it has been illegal NOT to indoctrinate children - even toddlers - with disgusting homosexual propaganda.
Putting your (censored) in someone's (censored) is NOT sex. It's masturbation. It's no different to putting it in a farmyard manure heap. It does retard emotional development though, and that's what those in power really want, a population of immature pansies incapable of resisting attempts to control our every thought, word and deed.
For the sake of America you MUST keep up the fight, and you MUST win. I wish you every success.
- Barney
And that reminded us of a much more refined (but related) recent posting at Defend the Family:
"Requiem for the Magna Carta"
Scott Lively, J.D., ThD.
On June 15, 1215, an intrepid group of English lords stood on the field of Runnymede and faced down the leviathan of arbitrary governmental power, represented at that moment by the heavy-handed King John. They called the list of concessions which they extracted from him that day the Magna Carta Libertatum, and this "Great Charter of Freedoms" has served as a mighty foundational pillar of constitutional law and human rights law for nearly 800 years.
From the Magna Carta have come such legal essentials to democracy as the right of habeas corpus (clauses 36, 38-40) and the right to due process of law (clause 29). But the clause to which the barons gave preeminence, placing it first in the list, was the one which provided that "the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired."
On March 21, 2007, another group of English lords, those seated in the upper house of the English Parliament, dealt the death blow to that great clause, which has protected not only the integrity of the English Church, but the notion that the church can stand as a moral authority independent of a nation's ever-changing social policies and political currents. Ironically, this long-standing freedom was cancelled by the approval of the Sexual Orientation Regulations of the Equality Act, a document which has all the appearance of a human rights instrument. In its implementation, however, this set of rules will have the effect of (among other things) prohibiting private Christian schools throughout the United Kingdom from teaching students the Biblical position that homosexual sexual behavior is morally wrong, and that it violates the evident heterosexual design of the human body.... Read more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)