Who are the most dangerous legislators in Massachusetts -- those who sponsor bills most destabilizing to society? We'll start with a list of the sponsors of the bill to decriminalize sodomy and bestiality -- a crime against nature, whether committed with mankind or with beast.
Rep. David Paul Linsky (lead sponsor), 5th Middlesex (Natick), 617-722-2210, Rep.DavidLinsky@hou.state.ma.us.
Rep. Ruth B. Balser, 12th Middlesex District (Newton), 617-722-2060, Rep.RuthBalser@hou.state.ma.us.
Rep. Michael E. Festa, 32nd Middlesex District (Melrose), 617-722-2018, Rep.MikeFesta@hou.state.ma.us.
Rep. Alice Hanlon Peisch, 14th Norfolk District (Wellesley), 617-722-2080, Rep.AlicePeisch@hou.state.ma.us.
Rep. Douglas W. Petersen, 8th Essex District (Marblehead), 617-722-2637, Rep.DouglasPetersen@hou.state.ma.us.
Rep. Ellen Story, 3rd Hampshire (Amherst), 617-722-2011, Rep.EllenStory@hou.state.ma.us.
Sen. Robert A. O’Leary, Cape and Islands (Barnstable), 617-722-1570, Robert.O'Leary@state.ma.us.
What are these legislators thinking? Why would they want to decriminalize bestiality? Their bill is H819, "An Act Abolishing Certain Laws of the Commonwealth," sodomy/bestiality being only one of them. It is soon to be acted on by the Judiciary Committee. (Urge this committee to kill it!)
H819 would overturn Mass. law Ch. 272, Sec. 34: Whoever commits the abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than twenty years.
Bear in mind that there are bills which "only" lessen the penalities for bestiality, or which keep it a crime while decriminalizing human-on-human sodomy. Legislators sponsoring these bills will appear in our upcoming list of Massachusetts' Most Dangerous Legislators, Part II.
Part III will include all those sponsoring very bad bills currently in the legislature. Part IV will list all those publicly taking money from radical homosexual political action committees.
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Friday, March 03, 2006
Memo to New Hampshire: Beware Romney
URGENT letter from John Haskins, Citizen of Massachusetts, to New Hampshire State Rep. Maureen C. Mooney (Feb. 27, 2006)
Please take the time to read this short letter before you meet with Governor Mitt Romney. I'm sending you two columns [linked below] I've published recently in a national forum about Romney. I encourage you to share them with other members of the New Hampshire state government, with the media, and any other persons you might choose.
Gov. Romney -- as you will become aware after reading these two short WorldNetDaily commentaries -- despite his loud claims of deep, firm pro-family beliefs, is a very different politician than one sees in public view.
He has been -- in the eyes of many alert and informed pro-family Massachusetts voters and citizens who understand the immutable authority of our written constitutions, state and federal -- a crushing disappointment.
He has demonstrated no awareness that the sovereign constitutional document which he solemnly swore to defend was written by John Adams and ratified not as merely advisory commentary to public officials, but as a protection against politicians who would seize the power of self-government from citizens and force society in a direction that violates the convictions of the citizenry. This is a man whose election as president of the United States would greatly dismay those very people who, believing him to be a man of conviction and principle, are likely to support him.
I do not know your position on the matter of homosexual marriage, but aside from the moral issues and concerns about its ultimate impact on children, there are grave constitutional problems with Mr. Romney's handling of what is widely called "gay marriage."
He flagrantly violated the state constitution and leapt well beyond even the expectations of the four militant, radical justices on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and used the power of the executive branch to illegally implement homosexual "marriage" -- without even waiting for the legislature to enact a law as the court wanted. All the while he pretended he was only obeying "the law."
Why did Mr. Romney go so far beyond what even the radical justices were asking for? Because he knew that most legislators were unwilling to enact any radical new law that had so little support from the public. Beyond this, the court's ruling is non-binding on the governor and the Legislature, according to the state constitution. But Gov. Romney must vigorously pretend otherwise in order to obscure his responsibility for the social, political, and constitutional crisis of illegal homosexual marriage licenses issued following his personal instructions to state officials. His instructions violated the existing law as ratified by the people's representatives -- despite the fact that the Massachusetts Constitution, by astonishing coincidence, explicitly denies courts any role in matters of marriage.
There is no dispute about these facts, and I will be happy to send you the portions of the Massachusetts Constitution that irrefutably deny the legality of both the court's homosexual marriage ruling and of Gov. Romney's subsequent, opportunistic actions.
Since Gov. Romney (under useful cover of a constitutionally void ruling, but nevertheless, unilaterally) imposed on the population of the state a fundamental change of policy on the basic building block of society, grave consequences have continued to arise. Public schoolchildren are subject to official indoctrination on homosexuality, and concerned parents are shunted aside as if they have no role in the moral and sexual education of their own children. Gov. Romney has publicly said he regards those opposed to homosexual marriage as "right-wing bigots" -- and rebuked his wife, son, and daughter-in-law for signing a petition for a state constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Again, Gov. Romney is NOT the man he will pretend to be when meeting with you and many inescapable parts of his political record will prove that to your complete satisfaction.
Since Gov. Romney personally imposed "homosexual marriage" in contravention of existing state law, under his administration, state and private adoption and foster care agencies increasingly give children to homosexuals, both single and "married" -- even in preference to traditional families that can offer children both a mother and a father. Is Gov. Romney unaware of the obvious: that children have a fundamental need and desire to be loved by both a father and a mother?
Please take the time to read these two articles and distribute them to others who need to know the facts of Gov. Romney's role in the biggest and most radical deconstruction of Western civilization, at least since the Bolsheviks. (Both are from WorldNetDaily.)
'Conservative' Romney buckles and blunders
It's crunch time in Boston
Thanks, for your attention to this very grave matter.
John Haskins
Associate Director, Parents' Rights Coalition
(c) John Haskins
Please take the time to read this short letter before you meet with Governor Mitt Romney. I'm sending you two columns [linked below] I've published recently in a national forum about Romney. I encourage you to share them with other members of the New Hampshire state government, with the media, and any other persons you might choose.
Gov. Romney -- as you will become aware after reading these two short WorldNetDaily commentaries -- despite his loud claims of deep, firm pro-family beliefs, is a very different politician than one sees in public view.
He has been -- in the eyes of many alert and informed pro-family Massachusetts voters and citizens who understand the immutable authority of our written constitutions, state and federal -- a crushing disappointment.
He has demonstrated no awareness that the sovereign constitutional document which he solemnly swore to defend was written by John Adams and ratified not as merely advisory commentary to public officials, but as a protection against politicians who would seize the power of self-government from citizens and force society in a direction that violates the convictions of the citizenry. This is a man whose election as president of the United States would greatly dismay those very people who, believing him to be a man of conviction and principle, are likely to support him.
I do not know your position on the matter of homosexual marriage, but aside from the moral issues and concerns about its ultimate impact on children, there are grave constitutional problems with Mr. Romney's handling of what is widely called "gay marriage."
He flagrantly violated the state constitution and leapt well beyond even the expectations of the four militant, radical justices on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and used the power of the executive branch to illegally implement homosexual "marriage" -- without even waiting for the legislature to enact a law as the court wanted. All the while he pretended he was only obeying "the law."
Why did Mr. Romney go so far beyond what even the radical justices were asking for? Because he knew that most legislators were unwilling to enact any radical new law that had so little support from the public. Beyond this, the court's ruling is non-binding on the governor and the Legislature, according to the state constitution. But Gov. Romney must vigorously pretend otherwise in order to obscure his responsibility for the social, political, and constitutional crisis of illegal homosexual marriage licenses issued following his personal instructions to state officials. His instructions violated the existing law as ratified by the people's representatives -- despite the fact that the Massachusetts Constitution, by astonishing coincidence, explicitly denies courts any role in matters of marriage.
There is no dispute about these facts, and I will be happy to send you the portions of the Massachusetts Constitution that irrefutably deny the legality of both the court's homosexual marriage ruling and of Gov. Romney's subsequent, opportunistic actions.
Since Gov. Romney (under useful cover of a constitutionally void ruling, but nevertheless, unilaterally) imposed on the population of the state a fundamental change of policy on the basic building block of society, grave consequences have continued to arise. Public schoolchildren are subject to official indoctrination on homosexuality, and concerned parents are shunted aside as if they have no role in the moral and sexual education of their own children. Gov. Romney has publicly said he regards those opposed to homosexual marriage as "right-wing bigots" -- and rebuked his wife, son, and daughter-in-law for signing a petition for a state constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Again, Gov. Romney is NOT the man he will pretend to be when meeting with you and many inescapable parts of his political record will prove that to your complete satisfaction.
Since Gov. Romney personally imposed "homosexual marriage" in contravention of existing state law, under his administration, state and private adoption and foster care agencies increasingly give children to homosexuals, both single and "married" -- even in preference to traditional families that can offer children both a mother and a father. Is Gov. Romney unaware of the obvious: that children have a fundamental need and desire to be loved by both a father and a mother?
Please take the time to read these two articles and distribute them to others who need to know the facts of Gov. Romney's role in the biggest and most radical deconstruction of Western civilization, at least since the Bolsheviks. (Both are from WorldNetDaily.)
'Conservative' Romney buckles and blunders
It's crunch time in Boston
Thanks, for your attention to this very grave matter.
John Haskins
Associate Director, Parents' Rights Coalition
(c) John Haskins
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Scottish Bishop Speaks the Truth on "Gay" Adoptions
"Gay" adoption is a big issue here in Massachusetts. We hope the Massachusetts Bishops stick to their guns and take this issue to court if necessary. By way of comparison, here's a Bishop in Scotland who is unafraid to speak the truth.
Bishop slams “corrupting” gay adoption plans
Gay.com (UK), Monday 27 February, 2006
A senior Catholic Bishop in Scotland has slammed proposals that will allow same-sex couples to adopt children together. The Rt Rev Joseph Devine, Bishop of Motherwell has sent a letter to Scotland’s First Minister Jack McConnell, urging him to drop the proposals and warning that the laws will erode society.
Noting that he will be branded a “bigot” for the letter, Devine says he feels the Catholic Church is being ignored in the row over the new laws. However, he promised that increasing numbers are "not prepared to stand by and watch the destruction of Christian values and truth".
According to The Herald, the letter warns that there is “mounting disquiet” about new pro-gay laws. "I am only too well aware, of course, that the conventional family unit is in decline and society is paying the price,” he writes. “But where the traditional family unit does exist, it should for the sake of the children be deemed a far more appropriate refuge for them than exposure to a homosexual or lesbian way of life.”
"No doubt for refusing to pander to the idea that homosexual and lesbian relationships are equal to heterosexual partnerships, particularly those blessed in the sight of God, I shall be termed a bigot by the politically correct hardcore in the Scottish Parliament," he added.
Bishop slams “corrupting” gay adoption plans
Gay.com (UK), Monday 27 February, 2006
A senior Catholic Bishop in Scotland has slammed proposals that will allow same-sex couples to adopt children together. The Rt Rev Joseph Devine, Bishop of Motherwell has sent a letter to Scotland’s First Minister Jack McConnell, urging him to drop the proposals and warning that the laws will erode society.
Noting that he will be branded a “bigot” for the letter, Devine says he feels the Catholic Church is being ignored in the row over the new laws. However, he promised that increasing numbers are "not prepared to stand by and watch the destruction of Christian values and truth".
According to The Herald, the letter warns that there is “mounting disquiet” about new pro-gay laws. "I am only too well aware, of course, that the conventional family unit is in decline and society is paying the price,” he writes. “But where the traditional family unit does exist, it should for the sake of the children be deemed a far more appropriate refuge for them than exposure to a homosexual or lesbian way of life.”
"No doubt for refusing to pander to the idea that homosexual and lesbian relationships are equal to heterosexual partnerships, particularly those blessed in the sight of God, I shall be termed a bigot by the politically correct hardcore in the Scottish Parliament," he added.
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Romney's Political Religion: Undermining Constitution
Gov. Mitt Romney appeared on Fox News Sunday (Feb. 27) with Chris Wallace. He said that, following Lincoln, he would proclaim his "political religion" as following the Constitution. With all due respect, we urge the Governor to re-read the Constitution he has sworn to uphold. And please note: The Court does not make law.
WALLACE: You know, it obviously is a very personal area, but I do want to pursue it a little bit, because, as you pointed out, in 1960, John Kennedy had to go before a group of ministers and talk about the fact that he wasn't going to take orders from the pope.
So let me ask you about the specific concerns that evangelicals have. They say that you believe in books of scripture that are outside the Bible, that the founder of the Mormon church, Joseph Smith, said that his was the only true faith.
So let me just ask you a couple of specific questions. Do you believe in the Book of Mormons and do you follow the tenets of Smith's religion?
ROMNEY: You know, I'm never going to get into a discussion about my personal beliefs and about particular doctrines of my church, and so forth. I'm very proud of my church. It was the church of my father, and his father, and his father before him.
But what I can say is this. And I go back to a speech that Abraham Lincoln made when he was 28 years old, the Lyceum Address, when he said that America has a political religion and that people who are elected to office subscribe to this political religion, which is to place the oath of office, an oath to abide by a nation of laws and the Constitution, above all others.
And there's no question that as I take the oath of office as governor, and have, that I make that my primary responsibility. And you know, I don't think getting into any particular religion makes any sense for somebody who's serving the public.
WALLACE: You know, it obviously is a very personal area, but I do want to pursue it a little bit, because, as you pointed out, in 1960, John Kennedy had to go before a group of ministers and talk about the fact that he wasn't going to take orders from the pope.
So let me ask you about the specific concerns that evangelicals have. They say that you believe in books of scripture that are outside the Bible, that the founder of the Mormon church, Joseph Smith, said that his was the only true faith.
So let me just ask you a couple of specific questions. Do you believe in the Book of Mormons and do you follow the tenets of Smith's religion?
ROMNEY: You know, I'm never going to get into a discussion about my personal beliefs and about particular doctrines of my church, and so forth. I'm very proud of my church. It was the church of my father, and his father, and his father before him.
But what I can say is this. And I go back to a speech that Abraham Lincoln made when he was 28 years old, the Lyceum Address, when he said that America has a political religion and that people who are elected to office subscribe to this political religion, which is to place the oath of office, an oath to abide by a nation of laws and the Constitution, above all others.
And there's no question that as I take the oath of office as governor, and have, that I make that my primary responsibility. And you know, I don't think getting into any particular religion makes any sense for somebody who's serving the public.
Monday, February 27, 2006
Deval Patrick: Bible Says No, but I Say It's Not That Important
Will the black community be deceived a second time about the importance of traditional marriage to their society's health?
In the 1960's, the poorer communities in America -- but especially urban blacks -- were misled by liberal-socialist-progressives into the belief that traditional marriage was optional. Great Society welfare programs would be daddy to their offspring. The resulting societal meltdown, especially in urban black communities, is not news.
But certain politicians, including Democrat candidate for Governor Deval Patrick, still don't seem to see the connection between devaluing traditional marriage and the violence on the streets. And people like Patrick are trying to sell blacks another bill of goods -- that there's no harm and a lot of good in recognizing same-sex "marriage". Why, it's a "civil right"!
How many direct hits can black society sustain? Why are some black church leaders accepting Deval as their candidate, even while acknowledging that homosexual "marriage" is contrary to the Bible? Some say that it is only one issue, and not the most important. (Though Bishop Gilbert Thompson, president of the Black Ministerial Alliance in Boston, has been critical of Patrick for favoring homosexual "marriage".)
Rev. William E. Dickerson II welcomed Patrick to worship service at his Greater Love Tabernacle Church in Dorchester yesterday. The Boston Globe reports:
Patrick is trying to persuade black voters to look past a possible disagreement over gay rights so they can talk about crime, unemployment, and other issues.
''I know what Scripture says about homosexuality, and who am I as a Christian to question what Scripture says?" Patrick told yesterday's audience.
''But . . . the point is that while we debate gay marriage, there are people struggling to pay the rent and the heat in the same month, and we have got to pay attention to that."
Can Patrick really convince this audience to ignore the elephant in the room?
In the 1960's, the poorer communities in America -- but especially urban blacks -- were misled by liberal-socialist-progressives into the belief that traditional marriage was optional. Great Society welfare programs would be daddy to their offspring. The resulting societal meltdown, especially in urban black communities, is not news.
But certain politicians, including Democrat candidate for Governor Deval Patrick, still don't seem to see the connection between devaluing traditional marriage and the violence on the streets. And people like Patrick are trying to sell blacks another bill of goods -- that there's no harm and a lot of good in recognizing same-sex "marriage". Why, it's a "civil right"!
How many direct hits can black society sustain? Why are some black church leaders accepting Deval as their candidate, even while acknowledging that homosexual "marriage" is contrary to the Bible? Some say that it is only one issue, and not the most important. (Though Bishop Gilbert Thompson, president of the Black Ministerial Alliance in Boston, has been critical of Patrick for favoring homosexual "marriage".)
Rev. William E. Dickerson II welcomed Patrick to worship service at his Greater Love Tabernacle Church in Dorchester yesterday. The Boston Globe reports:
Patrick is trying to persuade black voters to look past a possible disagreement over gay rights so they can talk about crime, unemployment, and other issues.
''I know what Scripture says about homosexuality, and who am I as a Christian to question what Scripture says?" Patrick told yesterday's audience.
''But . . . the point is that while we debate gay marriage, there are people struggling to pay the rent and the heat in the same month, and we have got to pay attention to that."
Can Patrick really convince this audience to ignore the elephant in the room?
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Polygamist: Current Law Violates Privacy Rights & Freedom of Religion
For some people, the "right to privacy" plus "sex between consenting adults" plus "freedom of religion" add up to polygamy. All three rights are touted as "unalienable" in modern America. And this is where the next challenge to traditional marriage is coming from: polygamists.
If there's no rational argument, according to liberal activist judges, to reserve marriage to two people of the opposite sex, what rational argument can be made to reserve marriage to only two people. Why not 3, 4, 5?
The Associated Press reports "Judge in Utah is ousted for polygamy." A truckdriver and part-time judge in Utah was just forced to step down from the bench due to his violation of Utah law against bigamy. He has three wives (who are sisters) and 32 children... And no doubt, generous welfare checks.
The polygamist says his right to privacy and freedom of religion have been violated by the ruling. "I had hoped that the court would see my case as an opportunity to correct the injustices that are caused by the criminalization of my religious beliefs and lifestyle," the ousted judge said. (From the Deseret Morning News, Feb. 25, 2006:)
[The mayor] acknowledged that although the circumstances were about polygamy, the opinion said very little about plural marriage. "Because the judge holds an important office, he can't engage in civil disobedience," [the mayor] said Friday.
He pointed out that both the Utah Attorney General's Office and the Washington County attorney declined to prosecute Steed or his wives for bigamy because they were all consenting adults. "The statute is never enforced. Why single out this judge for special treatment?" he said.
Pro-polygamy groups had hoped [Judge] Steed's case would lead to the decriminalization of polygamy. Mary Batchelor with the group Principle Voices of Polygamy called it hypocritical. "Judge Steed may not be prosecuted for having several wives, but ultimately his having multiple mistresses or committing adultery would not bring the same admonition or censure as this," she said. "Honestly, is the state going to fire judges who commit adultery? Would the state fire gay judges?"
For his part, Steed hopes polygamy is eventually decriminalized. "I am hopeful that the court will eventually consider the issue of polygamy as an aspect of personal privacy, marital rights and religious freedom," he said in his statement Friday. "I am proud of my efforts to bring the issue before the court and the people of Utah."
If there's no rational argument, according to liberal activist judges, to reserve marriage to two people of the opposite sex, what rational argument can be made to reserve marriage to only two people. Why not 3, 4, 5?
The Associated Press reports "Judge in Utah is ousted for polygamy." A truckdriver and part-time judge in Utah was just forced to step down from the bench due to his violation of Utah law against bigamy. He has three wives (who are sisters) and 32 children... And no doubt, generous welfare checks.
The polygamist says his right to privacy and freedom of religion have been violated by the ruling. "I had hoped that the court would see my case as an opportunity to correct the injustices that are caused by the criminalization of my religious beliefs and lifestyle," the ousted judge said. (From the Deseret Morning News, Feb. 25, 2006:)
[The mayor] acknowledged that although the circumstances were about polygamy, the opinion said very little about plural marriage. "Because the judge holds an important office, he can't engage in civil disobedience," [the mayor] said Friday.
He pointed out that both the Utah Attorney General's Office and the Washington County attorney declined to prosecute Steed or his wives for bigamy because they were all consenting adults. "The statute is never enforced. Why single out this judge for special treatment?" he said.
Pro-polygamy groups had hoped [Judge] Steed's case would lead to the decriminalization of polygamy. Mary Batchelor with the group Principle Voices of Polygamy called it hypocritical. "Judge Steed may not be prosecuted for having several wives, but ultimately his having multiple mistresses or committing adultery would not bring the same admonition or censure as this," she said. "Honestly, is the state going to fire judges who commit adultery? Would the state fire gay judges?"
For his part, Steed hopes polygamy is eventually decriminalized. "I am hopeful that the court will eventually consider the issue of polygamy as an aspect of personal privacy, marital rights and religious freedom," he said in his statement Friday. "I am proud of my efforts to bring the issue before the court and the people of Utah."
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Why Won't Globe Say: Newton's New Principal and "HER WIFE"
We've pointed out this phenomenon before: the mainstream media realizes in its propagandistic wisdom that it simply can't push the general public too fast. While you'll read about a man and "his husband" in homosexual publications, the MSM often uses the locution "spouse" when speaking of a same-sex "married" partner. Along these lines, see this new piece in WorldNetDaily by our associate John Haskins [Parents' Rights Coalition]:
The Boston Globe: Pimping for 'gays'
An open letter to Helen Donovan, editor of the Globe on its article "Gay principals soon take helm at both Newton high schools."
Dear Helen:
Under your supervision – or that of another of the homosexuality marketeers now running the Globe – we got this latest little goodie:
"Jennifer Price, 34, is a doctoral student at Harvard's Graduate School of Education who lives in Newton with her spouse and their two young children. She takes over at Newton North High School in July."
Now, Helen, you're not intentionally avoiding a franker use of English just so the precipitously declining readership of this once great newspaper won't be confronted with the sheer absurdity of this propaganda, are you? Why not simply write "her wife"?
The word "spouse" is really only used when one does not know or is not willing to reveal the gender, or when referring to a mixed-gender group. That is not the case here, Helen, so what are you hiding? Get on with the revolution, girl! ... [Read more on WorldNetDaily...]
The Boston Globe: Pimping for 'gays'
An open letter to Helen Donovan, editor of the Globe on its article "Gay principals soon take helm at both Newton high schools."
Dear Helen:
Under your supervision – or that of another of the homosexuality marketeers now running the Globe – we got this latest little goodie:
"Jennifer Price, 34, is a doctoral student at Harvard's Graduate School of Education who lives in Newton with her spouse and their two young children. She takes over at Newton North High School in July."
Now, Helen, you're not intentionally avoiding a franker use of English just so the precipitously declining readership of this once great newspaper won't be confronted with the sheer absurdity of this propaganda, are you? Why not simply write "her wife"?
The word "spouse" is really only used when one does not know or is not willing to reveal the gender, or when referring to a mixed-gender group. That is not the case here, Helen, so what are you hiding? Get on with the revolution, girl! ... [Read more on WorldNetDaily...]
Friday, February 24, 2006
British Lord Warns American Christians
Pastor Tom Crouse of the Holland Congregational Church, who put together the "Mr. Hetero" event in Worcester last week, is a guest on the MassResistance radio program this weekend. (WTTT Boston, AM1150, Saturday 9 a.m. and Sunday 7 p.m.) He mentions that the Christian churches have really chickened out on the LGBT issue, and even left him hanging once those activists descended on him (including death threats). His event , essentially a traditional Biblical religious take on homosexuality, needs to be defended by all pro-family religous conservatives, whatever one's denomination.
(What's happened to America's backbone? Whether vis-a-vis Islamic terrorits or "gay" terrorists, we observe a wussiness unmatched in American history. Blame it on the "feminization" of America?)
Apropos, we saw yet another urgent warning to American Christians to show more courage before our freedom of religion disappears. As reported by Agape Press, a member of the British House of Lords spoke at a recent convention of religious broadcasters:
A member of the British House of Lords has told the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) convention in Dallas that biblical preaching could be outlawed unless Christians become more politically active.
Recently the British Parliament nearly passed legislation that would have amended that nation's Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and outlawed incitement to religious hatred. The measure lost by a single vote -- the vote of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who left early, confident that the bill would pass without him.
John Taylor, a member of the House of Lords, spoke at this week's NRB gathering in Texas. Taylor said passage of the bill could have led to pastors being arrested for so-called "hate speech." Unless Christians take action, says Taylor, clergy in his country -- as well as in the United States -- could fall victim to such statutes, should they be enacted.
"There's an old saying that things won't change until people change," Taylor says. "So we can moan about these [political] institutions and so forth, or we can basically get in there. We are called to be salt and light -- so why don't we take over the Senate and Congress and so forth?"
Our friend John Haskins comments:
We have seen a Swedish pastor arrested and sentenced to four years in prison for preaching from his Bible against homosexuality. We have seen many similar things happen in Britain, elsewhere in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States. We are in the midst of the biggest tidal change in Western Civilization, possibly since Constantine embraced Christianity -- bigger probably than the onset of fascism and communism, and bigger than the Protestant Reformation.
Yet we vastly outnumber the "enemy." All of this is possible only because the Christian Church has been preoccupied with materialism and conformity. We have betrayed the legacy that we were obliged to preserve for our children -- and have done so while using their material prosperity as the excuse. Even most of our church leaders are totally caught up in middle-class lifestyle Christianity. "We have met the enemy, and it is us."
(What's happened to America's backbone? Whether vis-a-vis Islamic terrorits or "gay" terrorists, we observe a wussiness unmatched in American history. Blame it on the "feminization" of America?)
Apropos, we saw yet another urgent warning to American Christians to show more courage before our freedom of religion disappears. As reported by Agape Press, a member of the British House of Lords spoke at a recent convention of religious broadcasters:
A member of the British House of Lords has told the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) convention in Dallas that biblical preaching could be outlawed unless Christians become more politically active.
Recently the British Parliament nearly passed legislation that would have amended that nation's Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and outlawed incitement to religious hatred. The measure lost by a single vote -- the vote of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who left early, confident that the bill would pass without him.
John Taylor, a member of the House of Lords, spoke at this week's NRB gathering in Texas. Taylor said passage of the bill could have led to pastors being arrested for so-called "hate speech." Unless Christians take action, says Taylor, clergy in his country -- as well as in the United States -- could fall victim to such statutes, should they be enacted.
"There's an old saying that things won't change until people change," Taylor says. "So we can moan about these [political] institutions and so forth, or we can basically get in there. We are called to be salt and light -- so why don't we take over the Senate and Congress and so forth?"
Our friend John Haskins comments:
We have seen a Swedish pastor arrested and sentenced to four years in prison for preaching from his Bible against homosexuality. We have seen many similar things happen in Britain, elsewhere in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States. We are in the midst of the biggest tidal change in Western Civilization, possibly since Constantine embraced Christianity -- bigger probably than the onset of fascism and communism, and bigger than the Protestant Reformation.
Yet we vastly outnumber the "enemy." All of this is possible only because the Christian Church has been preoccupied with materialism and conformity. We have betrayed the legacy that we were obliged to preserve for our children -- and have done so while using their material prosperity as the excuse. Even most of our church leaders are totally caught up in middle-class lifestyle Christianity. "We have met the enemy, and it is us."
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Boston Herald Story Shines Light on Very Dark World
The Boston Herald ran a story today about a "gay" cruising website that posts hook-up locations with rankings. It seems that the Malden City Hall men's restroom was seeing a lot of 5-star activity.
We will not post the direct link to that website, since it is disgusting and pornographic. But if you want to know where this activity is taking place in your own community, you can Google it directly ("gay cruising" + Massachusetts).
Now the question becomes: Why are the police not getting this under control? Might it have something to do with "sensitivity training"? The Gay Officers Action League of New England (website not up just now) is out there pounding on all the police departments.
We will not post the direct link to that website, since it is disgusting and pornographic. But if you want to know where this activity is taking place in your own community, you can Google it directly ("gay cruising" + Massachusetts).
Now the question becomes: Why are the police not getting this under control? Might it have something to do with "sensitivity training"? The Gay Officers Action League of New England (website not up just now) is out there pounding on all the police departments.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Teens Experimenting with "Bisexuality"
Is "sexual orientation" inborn? (How is this term defined, anyhow?) Is "bisexuality" inborn? Read the article (linked below) and then answer those questions.
The latest chic thing is for young teens to say they're "bi". We hear that many of the 9th-grade girls at a west suburban Boston high school are claiming this identity -- "to get attention," say the slightly older girls who are our sources. And we've witnessed 13 to 14-year-old girls wildly making out (with each other, not with boys) in public, at a "safe" teen club in southern New Hampshire. It's the latest chic thing. (Needless to say, adult authority figures are nowhere to be found when this is going on in the school or club settings.)
A "bi-clique" is detailed in "The Cuddle Puddle of Stuyvesant High School," from New York Magazine. This is where sex ed and homosex ed have brought us. Excerpts (with emphasis added):
[Students at the school] are in the process of working up their own language to describe their behavior. Along with gay, straight, and bisexual, they’ll drop in new words, some of which they’ve coined themselves: polysexual, ambisexual, pansexual, pansensual, polyfide, bi-curious, bi-queer, fluid, metroflexible, heteroflexible, heterosexual with lesbian tendencies—or, as Alair puts it, “just sexual.” The terms are designed less to achieve specificity than to leave all options open....
Their sexual behavior is by no means the norm at their school; Stuyvesant has some 3,000 students, and Alair’s group numbers a couple dozen. But they’re also not the only kids at school who experiment with members of the same sex. “Other people do it, too,” said a junior who’s part of a more popular crowd. “They get drunk and want to be a sex object. But that’s different. Those people aren’t bisexual.” Alair and her friends, on the other hand, are known as the “bi clique.” In the social strata, they’re closer to the cool kids than to the nerds. The boys have shaggy hair and T-shirts emblazoned with the names of sixties rockers. The girls are pretty and clever and extroverted....
It’s true that girls have always experimented, but it’s typically been furtive, kept quiet. The difference now is how these girls are flaunting it. It’s become a form of exhibitionism, a way to get noticed at an age when getting noticed is what it’s all about. And as rebellions go, it’s pretty safe. Hooking up with girls won’t get them pregnant. It won’t hurt their GPA. It won’t keep them out of honor societies, social groups, the Ivy League....
In the end, the Stuyvesant cuddle puddle might just be a trickle-down version of the collegiate “gay until graduation.” On the other hand, these girls are experimenting at an earlier age, when their identities and their ideas about what they want in a partner are still being formed. Will it affect the way they choose to live their adult lives? ...
The latest chic thing is for young teens to say they're "bi". We hear that many of the 9th-grade girls at a west suburban Boston high school are claiming this identity -- "to get attention," say the slightly older girls who are our sources. And we've witnessed 13 to 14-year-old girls wildly making out (with each other, not with boys) in public, at a "safe" teen club in southern New Hampshire. It's the latest chic thing. (Needless to say, adult authority figures are nowhere to be found when this is going on in the school or club settings.)
A "bi-clique" is detailed in "The Cuddle Puddle of Stuyvesant High School," from New York Magazine. This is where sex ed and homosex ed have brought us. Excerpts (with emphasis added):
[Students at the school] are in the process of working up their own language to describe their behavior. Along with gay, straight, and bisexual, they’ll drop in new words, some of which they’ve coined themselves: polysexual, ambisexual, pansexual, pansensual, polyfide, bi-curious, bi-queer, fluid, metroflexible, heteroflexible, heterosexual with lesbian tendencies—or, as Alair puts it, “just sexual.” The terms are designed less to achieve specificity than to leave all options open....
Their sexual behavior is by no means the norm at their school; Stuyvesant has some 3,000 students, and Alair’s group numbers a couple dozen. But they’re also not the only kids at school who experiment with members of the same sex. “Other people do it, too,” said a junior who’s part of a more popular crowd. “They get drunk and want to be a sex object. But that’s different. Those people aren’t bisexual.” Alair and her friends, on the other hand, are known as the “bi clique.” In the social strata, they’re closer to the cool kids than to the nerds. The boys have shaggy hair and T-shirts emblazoned with the names of sixties rockers. The girls are pretty and clever and extroverted....
It’s true that girls have always experimented, but it’s typically been furtive, kept quiet. The difference now is how these girls are flaunting it. It’s become a form of exhibitionism, a way to get noticed at an age when getting noticed is what it’s all about. And as rebellions go, it’s pretty safe. Hooking up with girls won’t get them pregnant. It won’t hurt their GPA. It won’t keep them out of honor societies, social groups, the Ivy League....
In the end, the Stuyvesant cuddle puddle might just be a trickle-down version of the collegiate “gay until graduation.” On the other hand, these girls are experimenting at an earlier age, when their identities and their ideas about what they want in a partner are still being formed. Will it affect the way they choose to live their adult lives? ...
Monday, February 20, 2006
Vulnerable Teens and Cowardly Christians
Linda Harvey of Mission America has just published two excellent articles.
The first, available on the Culture and Family Institute/CWA website, focuses on the exploitation of vulnerable teenagers by homosexual activists who are clearly recruiting. See "Fairy Tales Don't Come True: Impressionable Kids and the Selling of Homosexuality." Excerpts:
... We've opened up access to our children by those who are not trustworthy. When people have views supporting homosexuality, they should not be involved with youth in any way, period....
Can a society create more homosexuals? The answer quite clearly is yes. That is how current homosexuals, in fact, came to be. There is no credible evidence for a genetic origin for homosexuality....
New research has revealed what many have predicted for years because of the media culture's constant promotion of homosexuality: More and more Americans, especially youth, are experimenting with same-sex sexual acts. A report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shows that among people surveyed in 2002, 11 percent of the females have had a "same-sex" sexual experience. This is up from 4 percent in a similar report in 1992. Among just teen and young adult females, the number was even higher-14 percent. Among males, homosexual experimentation increased to 6 percent in 2002 compared to 4.9 percent in 1992.4
Another piece by Harvey on the Renew America website is "A plea to pastors and Christian leaders: What's at stake for Christians in the war over homosexuality." Excerpt:
I am increasingly convinced that much of the Church will have a lot of explaining to do. Why did most pastors allow evil to be "sold" to our young people with barely a whimper of protest? Why did you allow this tragic behavior to become a chic cause celebre in the media without trying to take a stand against it? Why did you let seminaries teach this blasphemy? Why did you spend little or no time in the pulpit dealing with this and all the related sexuality issues — promiscuity, pornography, adultery, fornication — sins that are tearing apart the families and personal lives of even Bible-confessing Christians? Why did you constantly decry "political involvement" when this is a deeply moral issue, one for which there are ready arguments to be made in the public square had more Christian leaders been willing to make them?
And the big question is: why do you let the world define what's right to do? What will be "accepted" or not? What is "hate" or not? This defense of inaction completely undermines who Christ is and what God is able to do. Such cowardice should make us tremble....
The first, available on the Culture and Family Institute/CWA website, focuses on the exploitation of vulnerable teenagers by homosexual activists who are clearly recruiting. See "Fairy Tales Don't Come True: Impressionable Kids and the Selling of Homosexuality." Excerpts:
... We've opened up access to our children by those who are not trustworthy. When people have views supporting homosexuality, they should not be involved with youth in any way, period....
Can a society create more homosexuals? The answer quite clearly is yes. That is how current homosexuals, in fact, came to be. There is no credible evidence for a genetic origin for homosexuality....
New research has revealed what many have predicted for years because of the media culture's constant promotion of homosexuality: More and more Americans, especially youth, are experimenting with same-sex sexual acts. A report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shows that among people surveyed in 2002, 11 percent of the females have had a "same-sex" sexual experience. This is up from 4 percent in a similar report in 1992. Among just teen and young adult females, the number was even higher-14 percent. Among males, homosexual experimentation increased to 6 percent in 2002 compared to 4.9 percent in 1992.4
Another piece by Harvey on the Renew America website is "A plea to pastors and Christian leaders: What's at stake for Christians in the war over homosexuality." Excerpt:
I am increasingly convinced that much of the Church will have a lot of explaining to do. Why did most pastors allow evil to be "sold" to our young people with barely a whimper of protest? Why did you allow this tragic behavior to become a chic cause celebre in the media without trying to take a stand against it? Why did you let seminaries teach this blasphemy? Why did you spend little or no time in the pulpit dealing with this and all the related sexuality issues — promiscuity, pornography, adultery, fornication — sins that are tearing apart the families and personal lives of even Bible-confessing Christians? Why did you constantly decry "political involvement" when this is a deeply moral issue, one for which there are ready arguments to be made in the public square had more Christian leaders been willing to make them?
And the big question is: why do you let the world define what's right to do? What will be "accepted" or not? What is "hate" or not? This defense of inaction completely undermines who Christ is and what God is able to do. Such cowardice should make us tremble....
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Slippery Slope to ... Bestiality?
A really fun play about bestiality has just opened in Boston. What to make of it? Some in the elite culture will argue that the subject of the play -- bestiality -- is just a metaphor for homosexuality, and that the play is really about the nature of human love, and where homosexuality fits in. Blah, blah, blah.
But the problem is, we in Massachusetts are beyond thinking in terms of metaphors about homosexual relationships. We have state-sanctioned sodomitic "marriage". And we have a bill pending in our Massachusetts legislature which would eliminate altogether the crime of bestiality. (See House Bill H819, which among other things would overturn Ch. 272, sec. 34 of Massachusetts law which criminalizes sodomy and bestiality.)
So when we look at this play, we need to think concretely about the impact of its focus on bestiality. Isn't there really something more than "metaphor" going on here, whether the playwright consciously intended it or not?
The deconstruction of Western-Judeo-Christian values has followed this pattern: A dangerous or taboo idea takes hold in the academic and/or arts community, then filters down to the popular culture, and then gains accession by our elected representatives. If it's playing on Broadway, it must be the next with-it thing. Hop on board!
Edward Albee's "The Goat, or Who Is Sylvia" opened on Broadway in 2002, even receiving the Tony Award for Best Play. Now it's at the Lyric Stage in Boston. It's about a family man, a renowned architect, who has a love affair with a goat named Sylvia.
The subtitle of the play is "Notes toward a definition of tragedy." The actress playing the betrayed wife said she was drawn to the role by the epic scale of the story, saying, "It feels universal and cataclysmic," like a Greek play about the downfall of a family.
The Boston Globe reviewer says, "It also feels, to everyone's surprise, extremely funny," and the first scene is highly comic in the style of Noel Coward.
The humor of "The Goat" is apparently a ruse to get people to "go there" and approach the concept of bestiality. After the humorous opening of "The Goat", you get to "the deep dysfunction." But, according to the Globe, audiences are left confused. That's because this is no Greek or Shakespearean tragedy. It's a "postmodern" jumble, intentionally confusing the audience, attempting to detach them from all their commonsense or moral moorings.
Greek tragedy did not juxtapose tragedy and levity. "Oedipus Rex" has no laughing moments, and its tragedy sprang from fate, not a man's choice to do it with a goat. Or take Shakespeare's "King Lear", where the fool's wisecracks are never purely humorous, but are connected to the very dark undercurrent of that story. Human pride and lust for power are at the bottom of Lear, not something as base as sexual lust for an animal.
"Albee asks the audience to buy into something almost inconceivable, [the actress] says: that Martin is not just having sex with a goat, but is genuinely in love with her."
"[I]t's perhaps especially magical when the play is so insistent on testing boundaries, pushing toward the edge of what audiences will accept, asking where passion becomes perversion" [says the reviewer].
Well, Massachusetts residents are beginning to learn that there are no more boundaries. There is no such a thing as perversion. There are only different "sexual orientations." And the "tragic" figure in "The Goat" just happens to have a sexual orientation towards beasts. Who are we to judge?
But the problem is, we in Massachusetts are beyond thinking in terms of metaphors about homosexual relationships. We have state-sanctioned sodomitic "marriage". And we have a bill pending in our Massachusetts legislature which would eliminate altogether the crime of bestiality. (See House Bill H819, which among other things would overturn Ch. 272, sec. 34 of Massachusetts law which criminalizes sodomy and bestiality.)
So when we look at this play, we need to think concretely about the impact of its focus on bestiality. Isn't there really something more than "metaphor" going on here, whether the playwright consciously intended it or not?
The deconstruction of Western-Judeo-Christian values has followed this pattern: A dangerous or taboo idea takes hold in the academic and/or arts community, then filters down to the popular culture, and then gains accession by our elected representatives. If it's playing on Broadway, it must be the next with-it thing. Hop on board!
Edward Albee's "The Goat, or Who Is Sylvia" opened on Broadway in 2002, even receiving the Tony Award for Best Play. Now it's at the Lyric Stage in Boston. It's about a family man, a renowned architect, who has a love affair with a goat named Sylvia.
The subtitle of the play is "Notes toward a definition of tragedy." The actress playing the betrayed wife said she was drawn to the role by the epic scale of the story, saying, "It feels universal and cataclysmic," like a Greek play about the downfall of a family.
The Boston Globe reviewer says, "It also feels, to everyone's surprise, extremely funny," and the first scene is highly comic in the style of Noel Coward.
The humor of "The Goat" is apparently a ruse to get people to "go there" and approach the concept of bestiality. After the humorous opening of "The Goat", you get to "the deep dysfunction." But, according to the Globe, audiences are left confused. That's because this is no Greek or Shakespearean tragedy. It's a "postmodern" jumble, intentionally confusing the audience, attempting to detach them from all their commonsense or moral moorings.
Greek tragedy did not juxtapose tragedy and levity. "Oedipus Rex" has no laughing moments, and its tragedy sprang from fate, not a man's choice to do it with a goat. Or take Shakespeare's "King Lear", where the fool's wisecracks are never purely humorous, but are connected to the very dark undercurrent of that story. Human pride and lust for power are at the bottom of Lear, not something as base as sexual lust for an animal.
"Albee asks the audience to buy into something almost inconceivable, [the actress] says: that Martin is not just having sex with a goat, but is genuinely in love with her."
"[I]t's perhaps especially magical when the play is so insistent on testing boundaries, pushing toward the edge of what audiences will accept, asking where passion becomes perversion" [says the reviewer].
Well, Massachusetts residents are beginning to learn that there are no more boundaries. There is no such a thing as perversion. There are only different "sexual orientations." And the "tragic" figure in "The Goat" just happens to have a sexual orientation towards beasts. Who are we to judge?
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Boston Globe: Consensual Sex Between Kids Normal
One of the new lines we keep running into is, "If it's consensual, it's OK!" Problematic even when applied to adults, we've started seeing this standard applied to sex involving underage children. We need to be alert to where this is going. One of the demands of homosexual activists is the lowering -- or outright overturning -- of age-of-consent laws.
Remember Judge Suzanne DelVecchio's recent opinion on letting a convicted rapist off with a suspended sentence, though his student/victim was an under 16? The judge said that since the boy who was raped was almost 16 and the sex was supposedly "consensual" (even though the victim was too young to legally consent!) -- the rapist goes free!
And today's Boston Globe runs another foul piece of "advice" in its "Ask Beth" column. A mother is worried because her 5th-grade daughter "confided that she had a sexual experience with another girl her own age." But Beth assures the mother that consensuality is all that matters, and that "experimenting" is perfectly normal. And of course even if the young girl is "gay", neither mother nor daughter should be concerned!
Beth also implies that "teen sexuality" (including "experimenting" -- as long as it's "consensual"?) should be accepted as normal. (Oh - and at what age does same-sex"experimenting" become an inborn "sexual orientation"? No answer.)
Kids her age are extremely curious and often experiment with someone of the same sex. Kissing or making out, even pretending to have sex, is common play. It is normal if it is mutual and doesn't involve coercion. Enjoying experimenting with a friend of the same gender does not mean she is gay or that it will lead to anything more.
Because your daughter was concerned that she might be gay, it is important to talk with her about why this worried her so much.... Teen sexuality is too often viewed negatively, which makes normal sexual development appear to be a disease.
Remember Judge Suzanne DelVecchio's recent opinion on letting a convicted rapist off with a suspended sentence, though his student/victim was an under 16? The judge said that since the boy who was raped was almost 16 and the sex was supposedly "consensual" (even though the victim was too young to legally consent!) -- the rapist goes free!
And today's Boston Globe runs another foul piece of "advice" in its "Ask Beth" column. A mother is worried because her 5th-grade daughter "confided that she had a sexual experience with another girl her own age." But Beth assures the mother that consensuality is all that matters, and that "experimenting" is perfectly normal. And of course even if the young girl is "gay", neither mother nor daughter should be concerned!
Beth also implies that "teen sexuality" (including "experimenting" -- as long as it's "consensual"?) should be accepted as normal. (Oh - and at what age does same-sex"experimenting" become an inborn "sexual orientation"? No answer.)
Kids her age are extremely curious and often experiment with someone of the same sex. Kissing or making out, even pretending to have sex, is common play. It is normal if it is mutual and doesn't involve coercion. Enjoying experimenting with a friend of the same gender does not mean she is gay or that it will lead to anything more.
Because your daughter was concerned that she might be gay, it is important to talk with her about why this worried her so much.... Teen sexuality is too often viewed negatively, which makes normal sexual development appear to be a disease.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Taxpayers Funding "Queer Art" at U Mass Boston
Do the taxpayers of Massachusetts really want to pay to have this photo hung in an "art" show at U Mass Boston? Our local homosexual newspaper dubs the exhibit "Queer Eye for the Queer Eye."
We found the photos awfully hard to look at. But you'd better look at them so you know what this generation of college students is being fed as their avant-garde art. As MassResistance has pointed out frequently, our young people are being moved beyond "homosexuality" and "bisexuality" into queer realms even their participants can't label:
One artist is... "a photographer interested in bending the classical ideas of gender and sexual identity, including labels. She doesn’t identify as bisexual, but prefers ambisexual to get away from the 'problem of binary language,' as she calls it."
One of her revolting pieces is "a large scale photograph featuring a gender-bending female posing in her underwear. George wanted it to be a spoof of the Calvin Klein underwear commercials of the 90s, featuring a woman with large breasts in a white t-shirt, strategically placed above a shot of her lower body sporting an immensely large package. A tattoo that reads 'Daddy' appears on her lower abdomen. It greets you as you walk into the gallery, and [the reviewer] was struck by the simplicity of the set up and the complexity of the issues it was bringing up: identity, sexuality, looks and in your face humor. Currently an assistant art professor at Bridgewater State College, her work (including a call for children of same-sex married couples) can be found on her website, ivanadamiengeorge.com."
Another exhibitor is a transgendered graduate of this fine university who "currently lives in Jamaica Plain. In Queer Eye, he has a series of photographs depicting the same head (his) placed on several different bodies, in part to confront people and their uncomfortableness with questions of gender, as he says. He then asks the viewer to decide which body is the 'correct' one, but for [him] the right one isn’t the point. 'It’s partly biographical, dealing with my own body image issue and gender stuff,' he says. Currently, [he] identifies as 'figuring it out,' having stopped hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery."
We found the photos awfully hard to look at. But you'd better look at them so you know what this generation of college students is being fed as their avant-garde art. As MassResistance has pointed out frequently, our young people are being moved beyond "homosexuality" and "bisexuality" into queer realms even their participants can't label:
One artist is... "a photographer interested in bending the classical ideas of gender and sexual identity, including labels. She doesn’t identify as bisexual, but prefers ambisexual to get away from the 'problem of binary language,' as she calls it."
One of her revolting pieces is "a large scale photograph featuring a gender-bending female posing in her underwear. George wanted it to be a spoof of the Calvin Klein underwear commercials of the 90s, featuring a woman with large breasts in a white t-shirt, strategically placed above a shot of her lower body sporting an immensely large package. A tattoo that reads 'Daddy' appears on her lower abdomen. It greets you as you walk into the gallery, and [the reviewer] was struck by the simplicity of the set up and the complexity of the issues it was bringing up: identity, sexuality, looks and in your face humor. Currently an assistant art professor at Bridgewater State College, her work (including a call for children of same-sex married couples) can be found on her website, ivanadamiengeorge.com."
Another exhibitor is a transgendered graduate of this fine university who "currently lives in Jamaica Plain. In Queer Eye, he has a series of photographs depicting the same head (his) placed on several different bodies, in part to confront people and their uncomfortableness with questions of gender, as he says. He then asks the viewer to decide which body is the 'correct' one, but for [him] the right one isn’t the point. 'It’s partly biographical, dealing with my own body image issue and gender stuff,' he says. Currently, [he] identifies as 'figuring it out,' having stopped hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery."
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Mass. Supreme Judicial Court Delays Out-of-State Homo "Marriage" Ruling
We read in the Boston Globe today that the Supreme Judicial Court:
... has waived a self-imposed deadline for ruling whether gay couples from other states can legally marry in Massachusetts.... The Supreme Judicial Court notified lawyers on Feb. 9 that it would not issue a decision within the 130-day window after oral arguments on Oct. 6, according to the court's Web site.
... has waived a self-imposed deadline for ruling whether gay couples from other states can legally marry in Massachusetts.... The Supreme Judicial Court notified lawyers on Feb. 9 that it would not issue a decision within the 130-day window after oral arguments on Oct. 6, according to the court's Web site.
Eight gay couples from surrounding states, all of whom were denied marriage licenses in Massachusetts, are challenging a 1913 law that forbids nonresidents from marrying here if their marriages would not be valid in their home states.
If the Supreme Judicial Court strikes down the law, same-sex couples from across the country could come to Massachusetts to wed and demand marriage rights at home.
We suppose the Court is hoping that Sen. Jarrett Barrios and other proud sponsors will soon pass their bills allowing out-of-state couples to marry. See Senate Bill #835 and House Bill #806.
It wasn't enough to create chaos in Massachusetts with the homosexual "marriage" ruling. The liberal elitists want the virus to spread across the country.
Again, the Boston Globe claims that "same-sex marriage became legal" here in May 2004. No, it never became legal. There was simply a court ruling. If it were law, how could there be BILLS PENDING to make it law? See House Bill #977 and Senate Bill #967.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
"The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement"
We've now received permission from the editor of that most interesting publication, the New Oxford Review, to post this MUST-READ article in its entirety. (See our earlier posting on this.)
"The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement"
by Ronald G. Lee
"The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement"
by Ronald G. Lee
Monday, February 13, 2006
Gov. Romney: Disband "Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth"
We read in Bay Windows a few weeks ago that Governor Romney has budgeted $100,000 for the so-called "Safe Schools" program in Massachusetts. While we're glad he lowered this from previous years, we say that even $1 is too much for the promotion of homosexuality to vulnerable teenagers.
The Governor has it in his powers (through executive order) to eliminate the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth." And its director knows this. Why doesn't he do this? You can call the Governor at 617-725-4005, or email him.
[From Bay Windows, 2-2-06:]
Gov. Mitt Romney seems determined to gut the state’s groundbreaking Safe Schools program, created and championed by his predecessors Govs. William Weld and Paul Cellucci. In his Fiscal Year 2007 budget proposal, released Jan. 25, Romney proposed cutting the Department of Public Health (DPH) funding for the Safe Schools program from the $350,000 it receives in the current fiscal year to just $100,000. In the current fiscal year, the Safe Schools program also receives an additional $75,000 from the Department of Education (DOE), but Romney’s FY07 budget has no specific funding from DOE set aside for the programs. Kathleen Henry, chair of the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, said it is possible that there could be some funding for Safe Schools in the DOE budget that is not specifically earmarked, but she said there was no way to discern that from the governor’s proposal....
While last year’s gains were modest at best, Henry said the Governor’s Commission plans to ask the Legislature later this month to restore the full $1.6 million in funding that the programs received prior to the cuts. She said the additional funds will be in large part targeted at what advocates believe are some of the highest risk LGBT youth, LGBT young people of color....
Romney proposed modest spending increases in his past two budget proposals, yet he spent last summer working to defund the programs recommended by what at least nominally is his own commission. [This thanks to efforts by Article 8/MassResistance.] His approach to LGBT youth issues has been such a marked difference from his predecessors that some advocates are thankful for even small favors. “Our major thing with this particular governor is to remind ourselves and people that we exist at the governor’s discretion, at his whim, and he could do away with us in a heartbeat if he wished to, and that he doesn’t gives us the platform that we need to then go to the Legislature and educate those budget folks as to what LGBT youth needs are,” said Henry.
MassResistance has left several voice mails for the "Chair" of the Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth, Kathleen Henry. For some reason, she has not gotten back to us yet. All we wanted to know was:
(1) How exactly the Commission planned to spend the $1.6 million she's hoping the Legislature will give it next year; and
(2) How many "Gay/Straight Alliance" clubs there are in our Massachusetts high schools now, and would she please send us that list.
Now, as a state employee, she is bound to answer this call for information. Maybe she'll tell you? You can reach Ms. Henry at: State House, Room 280, Boston, MA 02133, phone 617-725-4000 ext. 35312. (You can tell her that the propaganda on her publications page needs updating: It's all 6-13 years old.)
The Governor has it in his powers (through executive order) to eliminate the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth." And its director knows this. Why doesn't he do this? You can call the Governor at 617-725-4005, or email him.
[From Bay Windows, 2-2-06:]
Gov. Mitt Romney seems determined to gut the state’s groundbreaking Safe Schools program, created and championed by his predecessors Govs. William Weld and Paul Cellucci. In his Fiscal Year 2007 budget proposal, released Jan. 25, Romney proposed cutting the Department of Public Health (DPH) funding for the Safe Schools program from the $350,000 it receives in the current fiscal year to just $100,000. In the current fiscal year, the Safe Schools program also receives an additional $75,000 from the Department of Education (DOE), but Romney’s FY07 budget has no specific funding from DOE set aside for the programs. Kathleen Henry, chair of the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, said it is possible that there could be some funding for Safe Schools in the DOE budget that is not specifically earmarked, but she said there was no way to discern that from the governor’s proposal....
While last year’s gains were modest at best, Henry said the Governor’s Commission plans to ask the Legislature later this month to restore the full $1.6 million in funding that the programs received prior to the cuts. She said the additional funds will be in large part targeted at what advocates believe are some of the highest risk LGBT youth, LGBT young people of color....
Romney proposed modest spending increases in his past two budget proposals, yet he spent last summer working to defund the programs recommended by what at least nominally is his own commission. [This thanks to efforts by Article 8/MassResistance.] His approach to LGBT youth issues has been such a marked difference from his predecessors that some advocates are thankful for even small favors. “Our major thing with this particular governor is to remind ourselves and people that we exist at the governor’s discretion, at his whim, and he could do away with us in a heartbeat if he wished to, and that he doesn’t gives us the platform that we need to then go to the Legislature and educate those budget folks as to what LGBT youth needs are,” said Henry.
MassResistance has left several voice mails for the "Chair" of the Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth, Kathleen Henry. For some reason, she has not gotten back to us yet. All we wanted to know was:
(1) How exactly the Commission planned to spend the $1.6 million she's hoping the Legislature will give it next year; and
(2) How many "Gay/Straight Alliance" clubs there are in our Massachusetts high schools now, and would she please send us that list.
Now, as a state employee, she is bound to answer this call for information. Maybe she'll tell you? You can reach Ms. Henry at: State House, Room 280, Boston, MA 02133, phone 617-725-4000 ext. 35312. (You can tell her that the propaganda on her publications page needs updating: It's all 6-13 years old.)
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Mr. Hetero Contest Drawing Angry Protesters
Looking for an interesting night out? Plan to be at Mechanics Hall in Worcester next Saturday (Feb. 18) at 5:30 p.m. Rev. Tom Crouse (of the Holland Congregational Church), who hosts a radio show out of Worcester called "Engaging Your World," is obviously not afraid to engage his world. And the radical homosexuals are enraged by his attempt to remind Massachusetts that there is such a thing as a normal, proper model to emulate!
Gay pride parades, the "Queer Games" in Chicago, drag/queer proms, "bareback mounting" movies, Orbitz queer travel pages, "Queer As Folk" TV shows, etc. are all the rage, with heteros expected to approve or keep quiet. But Rev. Crouse has had enough of such propaganda, and thought he'd counter it with a little truth.
The Mr. Hetero website calls the event, "A real competition that will bring fun and laughter as we celebrate God's design." From that site:
Tom has been called by the homosexual activists everything from Osama Bin Laden- to Hitler. Why? Because he has the nerve to have an event celebrating Gods design of Heterosexuality, and also has the nerve to have at the event someone who will give testimony to the fact that Jesus Christ freed them from all their sins.
Due to all of the pressure from those activists, the original venue, the Sturbridge Host- cancelled the event two days after assuring Tom that everything was fine with having the event at their facility. Not to be deterred, Tom went to Mechanics Hall to see about the possibility of holding the event there, and that is where it will be. A bigger and better venue!
The radical homosexuals are labeling this is a "hate" event, and they're organizing a demonstration outside Mechanics Hall starting at 5:30. QueerToday.com, which organized the assault on the Focus on the Family/Love Won Out Conference at the Tremont Temple last October, is also rallying troops.
Guess who has to pay for extra police to keep the peace? Wouldn't it make sense that the disrupters should pay? But we've heard that Rev. Crouse has been told to cover for the extra police, if he wants his event to proceed!
Gay pride parades, the "Queer Games" in Chicago, drag/queer proms, "bareback mounting" movies, Orbitz queer travel pages, "Queer As Folk" TV shows, etc. are all the rage, with heteros expected to approve or keep quiet. But Rev. Crouse has had enough of such propaganda, and thought he'd counter it with a little truth.
The Mr. Hetero website calls the event, "A real competition that will bring fun and laughter as we celebrate God's design." From that site:
Tom has been called by the homosexual activists everything from Osama Bin Laden- to Hitler. Why? Because he has the nerve to have an event celebrating Gods design of Heterosexuality, and also has the nerve to have at the event someone who will give testimony to the fact that Jesus Christ freed them from all their sins.
Due to all of the pressure from those activists, the original venue, the Sturbridge Host- cancelled the event two days after assuring Tom that everything was fine with having the event at their facility. Not to be deterred, Tom went to Mechanics Hall to see about the possibility of holding the event there, and that is where it will be. A bigger and better venue!
The radical homosexuals are labeling this is a "hate" event, and they're organizing a demonstration outside Mechanics Hall starting at 5:30. QueerToday.com, which organized the assault on the Focus on the Family/Love Won Out Conference at the Tremont Temple last October, is also rallying troops.
Guess who has to pay for extra police to keep the peace? Wouldn't it make sense that the disrupters should pay? But we've heard that Rev. Crouse has been told to cover for the extra police, if he wants his event to proceed!
Abuse and Confusion in the Trans World
We've noted the confusion among "trans" people before. But any time we read their own words, we're disturbed and saddened, both for people already drawn into this, and all the young people being led into this unhappy world by our high schools and gay clubs.
Quotes from the founder of the monthly "trans" event called "GenderCrash" (see recent profile in Bay Windows) illustrate this confusion. (Identified as "he" in the article, the photo appears to be of a woman):
An organizer and outreach coordinator for The Network/La Red (a Boston area domestic violence organization serving lesbian, and bi women and transgender people), and an abuse survivor, Scott admits he’s seen his share of trauma. He says one of the most difficult things about his work with The Network/La Red is raising awareness about domestic violence within the GBLT community.
“I think we can have conversations about violence that happens to us from outside the community but when it comes to violence within the community, people get really hush-hush and want to justify and excuse it away. And we just can’t do that.”
Scott says its critical for gay, lesbian and trans people to accept that partner abuse happens in our community — because we are likely to experience it ourselves. “With GLBT folks — across the board — we see one in four being a victim of partner abuse at one point in their lives.”
Early trans activism, Scott argues, revolved around issues of older, white middle class MTFs [male-to-females] who pressed for such rights as having insurance companies cover medical transitions. But working class trans people and trans people of color, Scott says, don’t have the luxury of those concerns. “Their main issue is getting a job and having a place to live. We can’t skip over that step. We need to start there and work our way up.”
“We are still a pretty racially divided city, both mainstream and GLBT and you can see that playing out in the trans community as well. I think that in some places that transwomen have been accepted into some lesbian and dyke spaces like the Dyke March and other things. And then in other spaces it’s not so accepted.
There are definitely gay FTMs [female-to-males] who are in the gay male community that have made a space for themselves and aren’t necessarily spending a lot of time in the FTM community but are in the non-trans gay male community. So I think it’s like having to choose which label is going to be predominant. There’s not a lot of space for someone to be their whole selves. There is [still] homophobia within the trans community; there’s transphobia in the gay and lesbian community.”
Quotes from the founder of the monthly "trans" event called "GenderCrash" (see recent profile in Bay Windows) illustrate this confusion. (Identified as "he" in the article, the photo appears to be of a woman):
An organizer and outreach coordinator for The Network/La Red (a Boston area domestic violence organization serving lesbian, and bi women and transgender people), and an abuse survivor, Scott admits he’s seen his share of trauma. He says one of the most difficult things about his work with The Network/La Red is raising awareness about domestic violence within the GBLT community.
“I think we can have conversations about violence that happens to us from outside the community but when it comes to violence within the community, people get really hush-hush and want to justify and excuse it away. And we just can’t do that.”
Scott says its critical for gay, lesbian and trans people to accept that partner abuse happens in our community — because we are likely to experience it ourselves. “With GLBT folks — across the board — we see one in four being a victim of partner abuse at one point in their lives.”
Early trans activism, Scott argues, revolved around issues of older, white middle class MTFs [male-to-females] who pressed for such rights as having insurance companies cover medical transitions. But working class trans people and trans people of color, Scott says, don’t have the luxury of those concerns. “Their main issue is getting a job and having a place to live. We can’t skip over that step. We need to start there and work our way up.”
“We are still a pretty racially divided city, both mainstream and GLBT and you can see that playing out in the trans community as well. I think that in some places that transwomen have been accepted into some lesbian and dyke spaces like the Dyke March and other things. And then in other spaces it’s not so accepted.
There are definitely gay FTMs [female-to-males] who are in the gay male community that have made a space for themselves and aren’t necessarily spending a lot of time in the FTM community but are in the non-trans gay male community. So I think it’s like having to choose which label is going to be predominant. There’s not a lot of space for someone to be their whole selves. There is [still] homophobia within the trans community; there’s transphobia in the gay and lesbian community.”
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Robida's Crimes & the Flawed Concept of "Hate Crimes"
Yesterday's Boston Globe ("Teen Gunman Took Own Life") reported that the New Bedford criminal Jacob Robida, who went on a violent rampage in the gay bar in New Bedford, "was known to have friends who are gay." He "had a swastika tattooed on his hand" and "told friends how he hated Jews and African-Americans." But apparently he never told them how he hated gays. (Did he have Jewish or African-American friends?)
The Bristol County District Attorney "said it remains unclear what triggered Robida's crime spree, but he said he hopes to release a report next week providing as much information about the events and Robida that investigators have been able to uncover. 'Some things we are never going to know,' he said."
We now know that Robida shot himself in the head, after killing an Arkansas policeman and the woman traveling with him. We ask again [still no answer from the homosexual radical activist crowd...]: Were these two murders "hate crimes"? Was killing himself a "hate crime"? Might he have hated himself? Why? Maybe he was conflicted on his own sexual identity, and in the midst of a severe psycholgical struggle.
Can we know with any certainty what led Robida to commit his horrible crimes? No. Even if he were still alive, we would likely not be able to discern his deepest motives.
But the very concept of "hate crimes" requires knowledge of motive. Realistically, won't there will always be "reasonable doubt" when it comes to a criminal's motive or "bias" in this sort of crime? So a "hate crime" cannot be proven. It can only be surmised.
Massachusetts is one of few states with "hate crimes" statutes including "sexual orientation" along with religion, race, disability. But a precise definition of "hate crimes" is hard to come by. The statutes are vague, and do not spell out clear standards or thresholds for determining whether a crime was in fact motivated by "hate." In fact, it's sometimes up to the victim (if alive) to determine if they're distressed enough to call the offense a "hate crime"! And "hate crimes" can include non-violent acts, such as speech and written words -- if the "victim" doesn't like them.
The Massachusetts Attorney General's "hate crimes task force" page says little. That office has produced a document called "Erasing Hate" directed at our schools! It states, "Certain types of language or conduct may indicate that a hate crime has occurred. Some indicators that a crime was hate-motivated include..." You get the idea -- it's all highly subjective. (This is "law"?)
The resources at the end of "Erasing Hate" include such dangerous organizations as the ACLU; Anti-Defamation League; Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian & Transgender Youth (BAGLY); Boston Gay & Lesbian Adolescent Social Services (GLASS); Fenway Community Health Center (that gave out the Little Black Book to teenagers last April); Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD).
And it's interesting that we find a list of applicable statutes on a Mass. Dept. of Education web page -- not on the Attorney General's site!
From a Massachusetts Governor's Hate Crimes Task Force document (2001):
A "hate crime" is a crime in which the perpetrator's conduct is motivated, in whole or in part, by hatred, bias, or prejudice, based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of another group or individual.
Hate crimes are characterized by bias indicators: "objective facts, circumstances or patterns attending a criminal act(s) which, standing alone or in conjunction with other facts and circumstances, suggest that an offender's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by any [prohibited] form of bias..." The most common bias indicators are verbal slurs, epithets, and bigoted language, written or spoken. Careful attention to bias indicator evidence is essential to appropriate investigation and charging of these offenses.
Massachusetts hate crimes laws increase the penalty that applies to crimes of violence, threats and harassment, and property damage whenever a prohibited bias motive is found to have existed. For example, the hate crimes statutes increase the penalty applicable to a simple assault and battery, which causes even minor injury to its victim, from a mere two and one-half years, to as much as seventeen and one-half years incarceration. Hate-motivated activity also exposes perpetrators to the risk of being subjected to a civil rights injunction.
The Bristol County District Attorney "said it remains unclear what triggered Robida's crime spree, but he said he hopes to release a report next week providing as much information about the events and Robida that investigators have been able to uncover. 'Some things we are never going to know,' he said."
We now know that Robida shot himself in the head, after killing an Arkansas policeman and the woman traveling with him. We ask again [still no answer from the homosexual radical activist crowd...]: Were these two murders "hate crimes"? Was killing himself a "hate crime"? Might he have hated himself? Why? Maybe he was conflicted on his own sexual identity, and in the midst of a severe psycholgical struggle.
Can we know with any certainty what led Robida to commit his horrible crimes? No. Even if he were still alive, we would likely not be able to discern his deepest motives.
But the very concept of "hate crimes" requires knowledge of motive. Realistically, won't there will always be "reasonable doubt" when it comes to a criminal's motive or "bias" in this sort of crime? So a "hate crime" cannot be proven. It can only be surmised.
Massachusetts is one of few states with "hate crimes" statutes including "sexual orientation" along with religion, race, disability. But a precise definition of "hate crimes" is hard to come by. The statutes are vague, and do not spell out clear standards or thresholds for determining whether a crime was in fact motivated by "hate." In fact, it's sometimes up to the victim (if alive) to determine if they're distressed enough to call the offense a "hate crime"! And "hate crimes" can include non-violent acts, such as speech and written words -- if the "victim" doesn't like them.
The Massachusetts Attorney General's "hate crimes task force" page says little. That office has produced a document called "Erasing Hate" directed at our schools! It states, "Certain types of language or conduct may indicate that a hate crime has occurred. Some indicators that a crime was hate-motivated include..." You get the idea -- it's all highly subjective. (This is "law"?)
The resources at the end of "Erasing Hate" include such dangerous organizations as the ACLU; Anti-Defamation League; Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian & Transgender Youth (BAGLY); Boston Gay & Lesbian Adolescent Social Services (GLASS); Fenway Community Health Center (that gave out the Little Black Book to teenagers last April); Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD).
And it's interesting that we find a list of applicable statutes on a Mass. Dept. of Education web page -- not on the Attorney General's site!
From a Massachusetts Governor's Hate Crimes Task Force document (2001):
A "hate crime" is a crime in which the perpetrator's conduct is motivated, in whole or in part, by hatred, bias, or prejudice, based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of another group or individual.
Hate crimes are characterized by bias indicators: "objective facts, circumstances or patterns attending a criminal act(s) which, standing alone or in conjunction with other facts and circumstances, suggest that an offender's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by any [prohibited] form of bias..." The most common bias indicators are verbal slurs, epithets, and bigoted language, written or spoken. Careful attention to bias indicator evidence is essential to appropriate investigation and charging of these offenses.
Massachusetts hate crimes laws increase the penalty that applies to crimes of violence, threats and harassment, and property damage whenever a prohibited bias motive is found to have existed. For example, the hate crimes statutes increase the penalty applicable to a simple assault and battery, which causes even minor injury to its victim, from a mere two and one-half years, to as much as seventeen and one-half years incarceration. Hate-motivated activity also exposes perpetrators to the risk of being subjected to a civil rights injunction.
Rare Strain of Chlamydia In "Gay" & "Bisexual" Men
The public health crisis stemming from homosexual behavior continues. A new, hard to diagnose strain of chlamydia is spreading through the community of "men who have sex with men." Keep in mind that some of these men -- "bisexuals"-- then spread these diseases to women. Common strains of chlamydia are known for causing infertility in women. The Associated Press is reporting:
A particularly bad strain of chlamydia not usually seen in this country appears to be slowly spreading among gay and bisexual men, an infection that can increase their chances of getting or spreading the AIDS virus....
[T]his illness is incredibly hard to diagnose: Few U.S. clinics and laboratories can test for it. Painful symptoms can be mistaken for other illnesses, such as irritable bowel syndrome.
And because LGV chlamydia doesn't always cause noticeable symptoms — right away, at least — an unknown number of people may silently harbor and spread it, along with an increased risk of HIV transmission.
"My feeling is that what we're seeing now is still the tip of the iceberg," says Dr. Philippe Chiliade of the Whitman-Walker Clinic in Washington, D.C., which diagnosed its first few cases of LGV last month and is beginning to push for asymptomatic men to be screened....
Chlamydia, caused by bacteria, is among the most common sexually transmitted diseases. As many as 3 million Americans a year may become infected with common strains, best known for causing infertility in women if left untreated.... LGV can infect both sexes, although new cases diagnosed so far are among men having sex with men.
A particularly bad strain of chlamydia not usually seen in this country appears to be slowly spreading among gay and bisexual men, an infection that can increase their chances of getting or spreading the AIDS virus....
[T]his illness is incredibly hard to diagnose: Few U.S. clinics and laboratories can test for it. Painful symptoms can be mistaken for other illnesses, such as irritable bowel syndrome.
And because LGV chlamydia doesn't always cause noticeable symptoms — right away, at least — an unknown number of people may silently harbor and spread it, along with an increased risk of HIV transmission.
"My feeling is that what we're seeing now is still the tip of the iceberg," says Dr. Philippe Chiliade of the Whitman-Walker Clinic in Washington, D.C., which diagnosed its first few cases of LGV last month and is beginning to push for asymptomatic men to be screened....
Chlamydia, caused by bacteria, is among the most common sexually transmitted diseases. As many as 3 million Americans a year may become infected with common strains, best known for causing infertility in women if left untreated.... LGV can infect both sexes, although new cases diagnosed so far are among men having sex with men.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Mass. Taxes: Funding Vile "Vagina Monologues"
Your Massachusetts tax dollars are contributing to a production of the vile "Vagina Monologues" in that quiet, lovely suburban community of Littleton. Posters advertising the event are littering the walls all around that area (and little children are sure to see them).
The usual suspects -- a group at the Unitarian church -- are putting on a production partly funded by the Massachusetts Cultural Council. (You can check your own town to see what's being funded there.)
Here's a list of VM productions around Massachusetts. Will it will be performed at the college your child attends -- or that you donate to?
The usual suspects -- a group at the Unitarian church -- are putting on a production partly funded by the Massachusetts Cultural Council. (You can check your own town to see what's being funded there.)
Here's a list of VM productions around Massachusetts. Will it will be performed at the college your child attends -- or that you donate to?
Monday, February 06, 2006
Public Health Crisis of Homosexuality
Are people finally gaining the nerve to speak openly about the public health crisis of homosexuality? We've had Dr. John Diggs's article posted on this blog for some time. But the politically-correct doctrine on AIDS has silenced many, afraid to be labelled "homophobes" or "insensitive." If we care about people involved in the "lifestyle" -- as well as the more abstract "public health" -- we should speak the truth.
At last week's Education Committee hearing on mandatory sex/homosex ed (Bill H1641), some testimony addressed these public health dangers. Notably, Dr. Gilbert Lavoie, an epidemiologist, pointed out that the risk of contracting HIV through anal intercourse is five times greater than through vaginal intercourse. (This is from CDC statistics.)
Yet many sex ed curricula never warn our children of this, instead treating both types of intercourse as equivalent and equally acceptable behaviors. And the whole propaganda movement in the schools -- the gay clubs, "Day of Silence", "Ally Day" etc. -- ignore the health aspect, and just present homosexuality as a "civil rights" issue.
(We're still waiting for someone to address the plague of so-called "bisexuality", which spreads diseases from "men who have sex with men" to females.)
WorldNetDaily recently published an outline of the public health concerns with homosexuality:
At last week's Education Committee hearing on mandatory sex/homosex ed (Bill H1641), some testimony addressed these public health dangers. Notably, Dr. Gilbert Lavoie, an epidemiologist, pointed out that the risk of contracting HIV through anal intercourse is five times greater than through vaginal intercourse. (This is from CDC statistics.)
Yet many sex ed curricula never warn our children of this, instead treating both types of intercourse as equivalent and equally acceptable behaviors. And the whole propaganda movement in the schools -- the gay clubs, "Day of Silence", "Ally Day" etc. -- ignore the health aspect, and just present homosexuality as a "civil rights" issue.
(We're still waiting for someone to address the plague of so-called "bisexuality", which spreads diseases from "men who have sex with men" to females.)
WorldNetDaily recently published an outline of the public health concerns with homosexuality:
- the higher incidence of sexually transmitted disease, not only HIV/AIDS
- risky behaviors, such as "unprotected sex" [and we might add "bug chasing"]
- promiscuity
- domestic abuse [a big problem in the lesbian community]
- shortened life span: sexually active homosexual male lifespan shortened by 8-20 years (1997 study in Journal of Epidemiology)
Rep. Alice Wolf: Arrogance of Power
Wolf about to promote her Bill H1641 at Education Committee, 1-31-06Rep. Alice Wolf, chief sponsor of H1641 -- the bill that would mandate sex/homosex ed -- has told the majority of Massachusetts citizens that they need to agree with her, or they have no business living in Massachusetts! If you don't think the state should have the final say on the moral education of your children in matters of sexuality, just leave the state!
That's a message pro-family activists are harassed with frequently in Massachusetts. The initial signers of the new marriage referendum are barraged with travel brochures in their mailboxes. Signers of the marriage petition receive phone calls from "gay" activists, calling them "homophobes." The MassResistance/Article 8 office gets emails urging their relocation to "Georgia, with the other bigots." And a pro-family activist's home has been broken into, with the message "LEAVE" left as a calling card.
The Boston Globe reported (Jan. 30, 2006 before the hearing on H1641):
The bill's main sponsor Representative Alice K. Wolf, Democrat of Cambridge said parents can have their children taken out of the sex education classes. [How can this be if it's a requirement?!] But she said the health education standards simply reflect a changing world. Same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and popular television shows portray gay and lesbian relationships.
"That's the way life is," said Wolf, who is also a member of the Legislature's Joint Education Committee. "If people don't want to accept that, I don't know where they can live."
Apparently, she doesn't want them to live in Massachusetts and bother her. This is typical of the arrogance of the liberals in our state legislature.
Not only is Wolf spreading the myth that "gay marriage is legal" in Massachusetts, she has actually performed the "marriage" ceremony for a "gay" activist (who writes about how to sneak homosexual propaganda into the public schools). And she is endorsed by all the culture-of-death groups (pro-abortion, pro-radical feminist, pro-homosexual "rights").
Great Article by Don Feder: Europe's Death Wish
Another great article by Massachusetts' own Don Feder (former long-time columnist for the Boston Herald) in today's GrasstopsUSA:
"HOMOPHOBIA," DEMOGRAPHIC DECLINE, ISLAMIC IMMIGRATION AND THE EUROPEAN DEATH WISH":
Instead of death by the slow poison of modernism, the Europeans might consider mass suicide. Either way, the outcome will be the same. Europe today is pathological.
Healthy societies exalt the family. Sick societies celebrate perversion -- and seek to ban healthy aversion to the same, in the name of equality.
Healthy societies have a clear understanding of who they are and how they arrived where they are. They both acknowledge and honor their religious roots. Sick societies are militantly secular. They engage in historical revisionism, pretending that faith played no part in their development.
Healthy societies have children. Sick societies are marked by below-replacement birthrates. They refuse to reproduce themselves. Having rejected faith, family and future, they lack an incentive for procreation.
The foregoing is crucial for understanding the resolution Homophobia in Europe, which was overwhelmingly enacted by the parliament of the European Union last month. ...
"HOMOPHOBIA," DEMOGRAPHIC DECLINE, ISLAMIC IMMIGRATION AND THE EUROPEAN DEATH WISH":
Instead of death by the slow poison of modernism, the Europeans might consider mass suicide. Either way, the outcome will be the same. Europe today is pathological.
Healthy societies exalt the family. Sick societies celebrate perversion -- and seek to ban healthy aversion to the same, in the name of equality.
Healthy societies have a clear understanding of who they are and how they arrived where they are. They both acknowledge and honor their religious roots. Sick societies are militantly secular. They engage in historical revisionism, pretending that faith played no part in their development.
Healthy societies have children. Sick societies are marked by below-replacement birthrates. They refuse to reproduce themselves. Having rejected faith, family and future, they lack an incentive for procreation.
The foregoing is crucial for understanding the resolution Homophobia in Europe, which was overwhelmingly enacted by the parliament of the European Union last month. ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)