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.

Deval Patrick: Bad Choice for Obama's Supreme Court

We saw in the Boston Globe that Obama may be considering Deval Patrick for the U.S. Supreme Court. We say he's eminently unqualified. From his September 2006 appearance at the Harvard GLBT candidate forum, he's committed himself to the most extreme demands of that movement.


To understand Patrick's extremism, look at the company he keeps. Last June, he marched in the Boston Pride parade to support his teenage daughter's "coming out". But he was also lending support to frightening groups promoting dangerous perversions, for instance the sadomasochists who marched right before him.

Deval Patrick marching at Boston Pride, June 14, 2008.

Marching just before the Governor and his teenage daughter were New England Leather Alliance members, who had trouble keeping their pants on and their whips under control.

As a candidate for Governor, Patrick met with the radical GLBT group at Harvard Law School (photo above). Not only is he fully behind "gay marriage" and "hate crimes" laws. While admitting that he didn't know anything about transgenderism, he also promised that he'd support the movement's demands.

See our postings from September 2006:

Gov Candidates Gabrieli and Patrick Favor "Transgender Rights":
"Although Patrick initially conceded that he didn’t understand issues like Transgenderism very well, Gabrieli’s insistence that there should be specific laws protecting transgendered and cross-dressers forced Patrick to affirm that he too, was in favor of specific legislation protecting the rights of transgendered individuals. ... Both candidates stated that they believed in the SJC gay marriage decision, and that they supported more legislation and action by the Governor’s office to extend new rights to the GLBT community."

See also: Transgender Tutorial #1 for Chris Gabrieli & Deval Patrick;

Transgender Tutorial #2 for Chris Gabrieli & Deval Patrick

When a CNN/Opinion Research poll is showing that most Americans (72%) want to see a conservative or moderate appointee, Deval Patrick just won't do.

A random perv at Boston Pride 2008.

"The Underground Journal" Exposes Betrayal by "Pro-Family" Leadership

With all the rumors of Romney becoming a Vice Presidential nominee, it's time for everyone to review his impeachable crimes against the Massachusetts Constitution. Check out John Haskins' and Gregg Jackson's 3-part series, "It's Not a Conspiracy. It's Just a Cover-Up" in The Underground Journal.

The Underground Journal understands what few have yet grasped, that "pro-life, pro-family conservatism has been hijacked by 'leaders' obsessed with money and power." And yes, that includes some of the "pro-family" groups here in Massachusetts, such as the Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI), which eagerly joined in the cover-up of Romney's constitutional violations (in his implementing homosexual "marriage").

MFI also sold out in its compromise on the VoteOnMarriage amendment wording (even claiming we could "dialogue" with MassEquality!); its failure to support the removal of the Goodridge-majority judges; its failure to support bills filed by MassResistance (including the Parents' Rights bill); and its pattern of hijacking work and research from MassResistance without accreditation, while publicly denouncing our "tone".

From the Underground Journal:

FACT: People We Trusted Are Lying To Us.

The Cover-Up for Mitt Romney Is One of the Biggest Scandals Of Our Lifetimes.

Distrust and anger toward the "conservative" elites are building among American conservatives. Donors to conservative groups, conservative talk radio audiences and voters who identify as Republicans are dwindling. Who can blame them? The "conservative" elites are failing to defend any boundary in the culture war or in our constitutions.

Grassroots conservatives sense that their real agenda is to defend their own perks. Real pro-family, moral conservative candidates are being undermined. Politicians who stand for nothing but pretend to stand for everything buy endorsements from trusted "conservatives." The grassroots are figuring out why election victories turn into betrayals on policy. There has been no greater betrayal in our lifetime than in the cover-up of Mitt Romney's actions in Massachusetts:

*Today, foster and adoptive children are given to homosexuals, and mother-father families are turned away because of Romney's blatant lie about the law.

*Romney also lies when he claims judges "forced" him to order local officials to perform homosexual "marriages." Americans needn't blindly trust Romney's lawyers. They can read the plain English that we are quoting directly from the Massachusetts Constitution. To fulfill his 2002 campaign promises to the homosexual Republican elites of Massachusetts, Romney flagrantly violated the Supreme Law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that he had sworn to defend.

*Romney boasts: "Every bill that crossed my desk I came down on the side of life." However, photos of him signing his health care law – after his "conversion" -- reveal a happy Ted Kennedy and the godfathers of the Democrat mafia of Massachusetts drooling with delight.

We are witnessing a massive cover-up. But the grassroots are figuring it out: Romney seduced and outright bought the "conservative" establishment. If you have not yet figured this out you are dangerously misinformed. Three articles just posted on UndergroundJournal.net will prove all this to you and much more.

Part 1 reveals how the Reagan revolution and much of the pro-family establishment have been taken over by mercenaries and opportunists who are cashing in and surrendering parents' rights and religious freedom to liberals and the powerful homosexual movement. In Parts 2 and 3, at the impeachment trial of Governor Willard Mitt Romney, our Founding Fathers John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Massachusetts Court Justice Robert Paine ask Romney the shocking questions you are entitled to hear answered -- but which the conservative elites refuse to mention.

What they haven't told you WILL hurt you, your children and your grandchildren! Click here to read the rest at the UndergroundJournal.net.

It's Not a Conspiracy. It's Just a Cover-Up

By John Haskins and Gregg Jackson

Part 1: What are Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham and Coulter hiding about Romney? And Why?

Part 2: Impeachment of Willard Mitt Romney: Adams, Jefferson & Paine ask Romney what Rush, Sean, Laura and Ann won't

Part 3: The Impeachment of Willard Mitt Romney: Adams, Jefferson and Madison ask what Rush, Sean, Laura and Ann won't.

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.]

National Review's Romney Endorsement -- Our Challenge

After their fawning endorsement of their donor, Mitt Romney, we sent this note to the National Review Online editors (for whom we had emails):

You have a whole blog dedicated to judicial activism … yet your magazine just endorsed Mitt Romney, who is guilty of causing the worst incidence of judicial activism since Roe v Wade to be treated as “law”. Professor Hadley Arkes even wrote an important piece in NATIONAL REVIEW highly critical of Romney on the day the “homosexual marriages” began in Massachusetts (thanks to Romney’s orders): "The Missing Governor" by Hadley Arkes (May 17, 2004). Arkes asked: "Have Republican leaders lost their confidence on moral matters?"

Does no one remember that prominent conservatives pleaded with Romney in 2003-4 to uphold the Mass. Constitution, and defy the illegitimate Court ruling on homosexual "marriage"? Phyllis Schlafly, Pat Buchanan, Mat Staver (Liberty Counsel), and even HUGH HEWITT (Weekly Standard, 11-20-03) told Romney to stand up against judicial tyranny. But Romney ignored them and singlehandedly began homosexual "marriage" in Mass. (The Legislature still has not changed our statutes to allow it, as ordered by the Court...which didn't even tell Romney to do anything!)

Why did Romney issue orders to his executive branch officials to change the marriage licenses and perform the marriages? There was no new LAW to enforce! If we couldn't trust Romney with the Mass. Constitution, how can we trust him with the U.S. Constitution? See our report: http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/

Only one of the 19 editors contacted, Jim Geraghty of their "Campaign Spot" blog, has responded: "Mass e-mailing editors who had nothing to do with the endorsement just pisses them off."

We answered: "I would love to know how NR arrived at a decision to endorse, if the editors weren't involved? Seriously, what was the process? (P.S. I don't appreciate language like "p off" – lots of us regular people still don't talk like that.)"

He then said: "I think I don't appreciate mass e-mails berating me for a decision I had no role in about as much as you don't appreciate the term 'pisses them off.' " (He just had to repeat that.) And then he sent us to his earlier post:

Wednesday, December 12, 2007
MIKE HUCKABEE, MITT ROMNEY
Another Thought On The Endorsement [by Jim Geraghty, on NRO's Campaign Spot]
Last night Rich [Lowry, editor-in-chief] explained a bit about NR's endorsement process to Hugh Hewitt:
HH: Take me inside first the process by which National Review arrived at its endorsement.
RL: (laughing) I don’t know, Hugh. It’s a really tightly held process here. It’s like selecting the Pope. We can’t reveal too much, but…
HH: How many people got a say in this?
RL: Well, it’s our senior editors, our publisher, our president and our Washington editor and myself. And we’ve been talking about it the last two weeks or so, just because this is our, through the quirks of our publication schedule, this is our last issue before people vote in Iowa and New Hampshire.
[Geraghty continues:]
So complaining to anybody else at NR or NRO is not really going to do any good. In fact, complaining won't do any good, period. If the magazine endorsed somebody besides your guy, you say, "I disagree," you hope it does Romney as much good as it did Phil Gramm, and then life goes on....

In other words, no feedback, no discussion welcome. The court has ruled, and that's that. (And he even continues with silly putdowns of Ron Paul's and Mike Huckabee's campaigns.) But these people rarely answer the substance of the question. Maybe Geraghty could do a little research on this all-important fact in Romney's record as Governor, then get back to us with a little more thoughtful response. He is the editor of NR's Campaign blog, after all.

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.

Will Massachusetts Follow Brazil with Free "Sex-Change" Surgeries?

Whether or not the "Transgender Rights and Hate Crimes" bill is passed in Massachusetts, there's a good chance that mutilating "sex change" surgery could soon be covered by your tax dollars. Our Supreme Judicial Court will surely confirm that health care, however defined by the individual, is a "constitutional right" as did the Brazilian court.

Brazil to offer free sex-reassignment surgery
Michael Astor, AP; 8-17-07

Brazil's public health system will begin providing free gender-reassignment operations in compliance with a court order, the Health Ministry said Friday. Ministry spokesman Edmilson Oliveira da Silva said the government would not appeal Wednesday's ruling by a panel of federal judges giving the government 30 days to offer the procedure or face fines of US$5,000 a day. . . .

Federal prosecutors from Rio Grande do Sul state had argued that sexual-reassignment surgery is covered under a constitutional clause guaranteeing medical care as a basic right. . . .

The health ministry said that since 2000, about 250 sexual reassignment surgeries considered experimental have been performed at three university hospitals. Brazil is generally more tolerant of homosexuality than other Latin American countries, with transvestites featured prominently in celebrations like Carnaval, but discrimination still exists.

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 . . .