The Boston Globe's story on the supposed upcoming vote on VoteOnMarriage's amendment in the Constitutional Convention, now postponed until July 12, only tells half the story. First, it's very possible that the Empress Margaret and her Supreme Judicial Court will come through once again for the radical homosexuals, and throw the amendment out as "unconstitutional". No mention of that here.
The Globe does note Rep. John Rogers' interview in Bay Windows (which we wrote about last week), where he probably too hastily confirmed the rumor that the homosexual caucus will sing songs on the State House steps and prevent a quorum at the ConCon, thus avoiding a vote. They know they have the majority to achieve this, but are unsure they have the 151 votes to block the amendment's required 50 votes.
But the Globe does not mention that VoteOnMarriage is item #20 on the ConCon calendar for that day -- while item #19 is the amendment with a pure definition of marriage. We filed it (#19) as a bill -- to become a statute, not an amendment! And why did homosexual activist Senator Barrios turn it into an amendment?
Let's see ... If Senate President Travaglini goes down the ConCon calendar items in order, #19 will come up for a vote first. It would define marriage as one man + one woman, no "civil unions", no allowance for the homosexual "marriages" which have occurred since May 2004. This amendment would require a majority -- 101 -- to pass, which almost certainly is not there. So the homosexual lobby knows they have the votes to defeat #19.
So how about this scenario: The ConCon goes right down the list, gets to #19, votes it down, then adjourns. Then no one can say they didn't take up a marriage amendment. And no voters can say they weren't allowed a voice (through their reps and senators).
The silver linings in this scenario are: (1) We'd have a recorded vote showing exactly where every legislator stands on marriage; (2) The terribly flawed VoteOnMarriage amendment would disappear.
Yesterday our legislators were smelling bouquets delivered by homosexual activists on the 2nd anniversary of the phony "marriages". How many more bouquets, and campaign contributions, will be delivered on July 12?
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
More "Gay" Health Risks Reported
Two stories in Bay Windows, reporting to the "gay" community on some of their particular health crises. These are the health risks we don't mention to all the teenagers being "educated" with the help of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, GLSEN, PFLAG, BAGLY, etc.
First, CDC releases data on rare STD found in gay men (5-10-06). "...(CDC) told press about the recent outbreak of a sexually transmitted disease called lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV) among gay and bisexual men in the United States, primarily in New York City. The disease, which is caused by a form of Chlamydia bacteria, can cause inflammation and bleeding of the rectum and colon, and CDC officials believe it is transmitted through anal sex. Up until 2004, when cases of LGV were first diagnosed among MSM in the U.S., the disease was largely prevalent in parts of Africa, Asia and South America but rarely seen in this country."
Also, CDC conference shows rise in syphilis in gay men (5-11-06). "... in 2005 infections among MSM [men who have sex with men] took a sharp upward turn, increasing by 87 percent. ...another challenge to fighting the epidemic among MSM is that more than half the men testing positive for syphilis reported anonymous sex partners, making partner notification efforts more difficult. ...MSM are less likely than their heterosexual peers to be diagnosed with syphilis during the primary stage of the disease, when it is most infectious."
Another "gay" newspaper, InNewsWeekly, notes the ongoing problem in that community with drug addiction, specifically crystal meth.
"Crystal meth is really different," says Jonathan Scott ... While Scott agrees that alcohol is still the number one offender in the GBLT community, he is finding men, and women, who become solely entwined in methamphetamine's grip. "We are seeing gay men lose partners, homes and jobs with an incredible acceleration.... crystal use can affect a broad economic swatch, like alcoholism and cocaine use, it has a particular stranglehold on the gay male community in New England. This drug at this time mixed with HIV is deadly... It can dramatically rob people of what they have."
First, CDC releases data on rare STD found in gay men (5-10-06). "...(CDC) told press about the recent outbreak of a sexually transmitted disease called lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV) among gay and bisexual men in the United States, primarily in New York City. The disease, which is caused by a form of Chlamydia bacteria, can cause inflammation and bleeding of the rectum and colon, and CDC officials believe it is transmitted through anal sex. Up until 2004, when cases of LGV were first diagnosed among MSM in the U.S., the disease was largely prevalent in parts of Africa, Asia and South America but rarely seen in this country."
Also, CDC conference shows rise in syphilis in gay men (5-11-06). "... in 2005 infections among MSM [men who have sex with men] took a sharp upward turn, increasing by 87 percent. ...another challenge to fighting the epidemic among MSM is that more than half the men testing positive for syphilis reported anonymous sex partners, making partner notification efforts more difficult. ...MSM are less likely than their heterosexual peers to be diagnosed with syphilis during the primary stage of the disease, when it is most infectious."
Another "gay" newspaper, InNewsWeekly, notes the ongoing problem in that community with drug addiction, specifically crystal meth.
"Crystal meth is really different," says Jonathan Scott ... While Scott agrees that alcohol is still the number one offender in the GBLT community, he is finding men, and women, who become solely entwined in methamphetamine's grip. "We are seeing gay men lose partners, homes and jobs with an incredible acceleration.... crystal use can affect a broad economic swatch, like alcoholism and cocaine use, it has a particular stranglehold on the gay male community in New England. This drug at this time mixed with HIV is deadly... It can dramatically rob people of what they have."
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
"Transgenders" at Harvard
[Photo: InNewsWeekly]At a recent "transgender" rally at Harvard.
Remember that Harvard's official seal proclaims VERITAS (TRUTH). Curiously, Harvard is ready to deny that humans are created either male or female. Why can't those really smart people get this self-evident truth?
There's even a list of all the 91 "gender non-specific bathrooms" on campus!
From the Harvard Crimson, April 12, 2006:
Harvard announced yesterday that it would amend its University-wide non-discrimination policy to protect “gender identity,” following growing pressure to safeguard the rights of transgender students and staff.
“Amending the non-discrimination policy to include gender identity is intended to reaffirm that all members of the Harvard community, including those who are transgendered, should be judged on their own merits, not their status,” said University spokesman Joe Wrinn. Harvard joins 52 other universities, including Brown and Cornell, in amending its policy.
The decision was announced this afternoon to members of the Transgender Task Force (TTF)——a group of students, staff, faculty, and alumni who has advocated for the inclusion of gender identity since 1997——in a meeting with Robert W. Iuliano ’83, University vice president and general counsel. ...
The University’s announcement only included gender identity, leaving out gender expression from the wording of the amended policy. ...
“Discrimination of housing, bathroom use, locker rooms, any gender space is a reality for many transgender students,” said Harvard Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA) co-chair, Ryan A. Thoreson ’07, who is also a member of TTF. “The non-discrimination code goes about a way of addressing that kind of discrimination and violence on campus.”
But some TTF members say this change in the University’s non-discrimination policy doesn’t go far enough in creating a safe community for transgender students.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Who Are Financial Supporters of "QueerToday" and BAGLY?
This caught our eye on QueerToday.com. Ringleader Mark is upset about many things, most curiously "the corporate take-over of queer pride"! What he doesn't seem to get is that he wouldn't have any platform except through the extravagant support from corporate America.
Some companies are just plain scared of lawsuits, so cave to every possible request from radical homosexuals. They curry favor in the homosexual community by throwing enormous donations to their radical groups. Then there are wealthy and multimillionaire GLBT business people who give to GLBT groups.
Now, Mark is employed as office manager at BAGLY, which receives lots of donations from corporate sources. Who's paying his salary?
QueerToday.com Thursday, May 11, 2006
Queer Liberation Not Assimilation! Pride '06
Are you sick of the corporate take-over of queer pride? Sick of the conformity? Sick of war, racism, and injustice? Are you eady to stand up for the transgender and queer youth communities? Let's create a lively proud and queer anti-war, anti-racist, pro-immigrant, anti-assimilation, anti-corporate presence in boston's pride parade. There's no pride in war and occupation. There's no pride in assimilation! Open planning meeting Thursday, May 18th at 6:30PM at the office of the Stonewall Warriors in Jamaica Plain at 284 Armory Street. It's time to take back pride!
posted by Mark D. Snyder
Some companies are just plain scared of lawsuits, so cave to every possible request from radical homosexuals. They curry favor in the homosexual community by throwing enormous donations to their radical groups. Then there are wealthy and multimillionaire GLBT business people who give to GLBT groups.
Now, Mark is employed as office manager at BAGLY, which receives lots of donations from corporate sources. Who's paying his salary?
QueerToday.com Thursday, May 11, 2006
Queer Liberation Not Assimilation! Pride '06
Are you sick of the corporate take-over of queer pride? Sick of the conformity? Sick of war, racism, and injustice? Are you eady to stand up for the transgender and queer youth communities? Let's create a lively proud and queer anti-war, anti-racist, pro-immigrant, anti-assimilation, anti-corporate presence in boston's pride parade. There's no pride in war and occupation. There's no pride in assimilation! Open planning meeting Thursday, May 18th at 6:30PM at the office of the Stonewall Warriors in Jamaica Plain at 284 Armory Street. It's time to take back pride!
posted by Mark D. Snyder
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Mass. Legislature's Scheme to Scuttle VoteOnMarriage Amendment
MassResistance has stated repeatedly that another attempt at a marriage amendment was not the way to go. Enormous resources and energy have been funnelled into VoteOnMarriage.org's flawed referendum effort. But to what end?
One of our warnings all along has been that the Legislature would find one way or another to kill the amendment in its cradle. Sure enough, a former ally of the pro-family movement who's now gone over to the dark side, Rep. John Rogers, lays out the scenario for scuttling the amendment when the ConCon reconvenes this July 12.
There are other scenarios as well, including the pending SJC ruling on the constitutionality of the measure; and the possible use of our bill H653 defining marriage, illegally turned into an amendment proposal by homosexual activist Sen. Barrios.
Leader in anti-gay marriage legislation outlines way to kill measure at the ConCon
In one of the most significant shifts in the battle to preserve equal marriage in Massachusetts, House Majority Leader John Rogers (D-Norwood) has come out in opposition to the initiative petition for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. The Legislature is expected to vote on the initiative petition when the constitutional convention (ConCon) convenes July 12. But Rogers said he would not be surprised if the measure is killed through a procedural maneuver.
Marriage equality proponents need 151 votes to defeat the amendment. But Rogers said he does not believe there are 151 lawmakers who would vote it down. He notes, however, that if there is no quorum of legislators when the ConCon convenes, no formal business could be conducted “and therefore the question will not be advanced through a procedural tactic,” he explained. So if 100 or more legislators don’t show up for the ConCon, the measure would die.
When asked if he believed it would be fair to kill the amendment that way, Rogers answered: “It’s within the rules to do it. This is not Texas where the constitution allows a senate president or presiding officer or even a governor to compel the presence [of lawmakers],” he said in a reference to a group of Texas state legislators who in 2003 prevented a vote on a controversial redistricting plan by fleeing to Oklahoma....
“Legislators won’t be hiding in Oklahoma,” Rogers predicted of the next ConCon. “In fact, they’ll be standing right in front of the State House steps probably singing freedom songs and hugging one another in plain sight, not cowering. If members of the constitutional convention want to do that, then the constitution contemplates that activity and that is perfectly acceptable as constitutional behavior. So that’s more than likely, at this point if I had to guess, that that’s what happens.”
Asked if he sensed an appetite in the Legislature to continue to debate the gay marriage issue at this point, Rogers acknowledged that issue is “emotionally exhausting” to many legislators and that the lengthy deliberations involve “painful divisions within one’s district and in the Commonwealth.” Most members, he concluded, would rather not deal with the issue....
One of our warnings all along has been that the Legislature would find one way or another to kill the amendment in its cradle. Sure enough, a former ally of the pro-family movement who's now gone over to the dark side, Rep. John Rogers, lays out the scenario for scuttling the amendment when the ConCon reconvenes this July 12.
There are other scenarios as well, including the pending SJC ruling on the constitutionality of the measure; and the possible use of our bill H653 defining marriage, illegally turned into an amendment proposal by homosexual activist Sen. Barrios.
Note the whining about how emotionally taxing this marriage issue is for our poor legislators! They just can't be bothered with this question, which has the power to destroy social stability in America! Later in the article, Rogers claims he's "grown" as a legislator, and his powers of judgment have matured. But he admits his emotional capacity for any serious debate has clearly diminished. We ask again: Where are the manly men? Have we no leaders with emotional stamina, principles, courage, or intellect in this state?
From Bay Windows, 5-11-06:
Leader in anti-gay marriage legislation outlines way to kill measure at the ConCon
In one of the most significant shifts in the battle to preserve equal marriage in Massachusetts, House Majority Leader John Rogers (D-Norwood) has come out in opposition to the initiative petition for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. The Legislature is expected to vote on the initiative petition when the constitutional convention (ConCon) convenes July 12. But Rogers said he would not be surprised if the measure is killed through a procedural maneuver.
Marriage equality proponents need 151 votes to defeat the amendment. But Rogers said he does not believe there are 151 lawmakers who would vote it down. He notes, however, that if there is no quorum of legislators when the ConCon convenes, no formal business could be conducted “and therefore the question will not be advanced through a procedural tactic,” he explained. So if 100 or more legislators don’t show up for the ConCon, the measure would die.
When asked if he believed it would be fair to kill the amendment that way, Rogers answered: “It’s within the rules to do it. This is not Texas where the constitution allows a senate president or presiding officer or even a governor to compel the presence [of lawmakers],” he said in a reference to a group of Texas state legislators who in 2003 prevented a vote on a controversial redistricting plan by fleeing to Oklahoma....
“Legislators won’t be hiding in Oklahoma,” Rogers predicted of the next ConCon. “In fact, they’ll be standing right in front of the State House steps probably singing freedom songs and hugging one another in plain sight, not cowering. If members of the constitutional convention want to do that, then the constitution contemplates that activity and that is perfectly acceptable as constitutional behavior. So that’s more than likely, at this point if I had to guess, that that’s what happens.”
Asked if he sensed an appetite in the Legislature to continue to debate the gay marriage issue at this point, Rogers acknowledged that issue is “emotionally exhausting” to many legislators and that the lengthy deliberations involve “painful divisions within one’s district and in the Commonwealth.” Most members, he concluded, would rather not deal with the issue....
Saturday, May 13, 2006
Bizarre Event at MassYouthPride OK with Governor Romney?
Does Gov. Romney still think his Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth is doing good work? We ask him to look again. Here is a profile of the person behind one of Youth Pride's big events, Gunner Scott of GenderCrash.com (a.k.a. ButchDykeBoy) who's running a session called "Words of Wisdom." Here's a person the Governor's Commission is presenting to teens as a courageous, admirable, and worthy of imitation.
Bear in mind it's not only on Youth Pride day that the kids encounter this stuff. It's what's being pushed by the Commission and the radical groups it works with all year long, through gay clubs in the high schools, the Day of Silence, the GLSEN Boston conference, school diversity days, and surreptitious curriculum inserts.
PLEASE, Gov. Romney, PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR SCHOOLS!
TransNation: Crashing gender boundaries
(Bay Windows, 1-26-06)
... Scott believes that there is a whole group of people who are trans amorous (even if those individuals don’t comprise an identifiable community) and these “transam” folks also face transphobia. Scott, who now identifies as a genderqueer female-to-masculine person, speaks from experience on both sides of that romantic situation.
“Before I came out as trans I was partnered with a transwoman. I was lesbian-identified and I lost more [queer] friends being with her than I did when I first came out [as trans].” Scott hopes that his trans activism will help create a world in which all people feel free to live in the identity that they most relate to....
“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 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.”
Boston Herald No Different than Globe
It used to be that the Boston Herald showed a little more common sense and less bias than the Globe. But not any more. The Herald didn't even have the news sense to pick up a tip on the two Lexington families' lawsuit over homosexual indoctrination in their elementary school. Now they run this silly editorial, totally missing the vile nature of the perverted world teens are being enticed into by the Governor's Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth. The Herald seems to think that the Court has the power rule "gay marriage" legal !! -- but goes on to call our efforts "ridiculous".
Gay youth panel survives, sort of
By Boston Herald editorial staff
Saturday, May 13, 2006
(Not worthy of excerpting.)
Gay youth panel survives, sort of
By Boston Herald editorial staff
Saturday, May 13, 2006
(Not worthy of excerpting.)
How Is "King and King" about Sex?
A recent email from Josh:
I find it unfortunate that you don't allow comments on your blog, it would be nice to see an actual dialogue instead of one man's views on the "gay agenda." I read your post on the book "King and King" and you say that the book is about sex. I ask you, is any book that features a family about sex? Or just the ones that feature people you don't like? -Josh
Hi Josh,
First of all, it has nothing to do with "people we don't like". There are plenty of heterosexual married people we can't stand. We are talking about marriage as an institution, not about the homosexual individuals involved in whatever domestic arrangements they choose.
You can always try a search on the blog for related articles. Try this one: "Yes, This Kindergarten Book IS About Sex" from last August, a few months into the David Parker/Lexington school story, where his son was given the book "Who's In a Family?".
Opening up this blog to comments simply invites a flood of hate mail. (We tried it.) If you want to communicate with us, use the link in the right column. We try to respond to any reasonable email, and post reasonable questions of interest. (We will also post hate mail if it's entertaining enough.)
I find it unfortunate that you don't allow comments on your blog, it would be nice to see an actual dialogue instead of one man's views on the "gay agenda." I read your post on the book "King and King" and you say that the book is about sex. I ask you, is any book that features a family about sex? Or just the ones that feature people you don't like? -Josh
Hi Josh,
First of all, it has nothing to do with "people we don't like". There are plenty of heterosexual married people we can't stand. We are talking about marriage as an institution, not about the homosexual individuals involved in whatever domestic arrangements they choose.
You can always try a search on the blog for related articles. Try this one: "Yes, This Kindergarten Book IS About Sex" from last August, a few months into the David Parker/Lexington school story, where his son was given the book "Who's In a Family?".
Opening up this blog to comments simply invites a flood of hate mail. (We tried it.) If you want to communicate with us, use the link in the right column. We try to respond to any reasonable email, and post reasonable questions of interest. (We will also post hate mail if it's entertaining enough.)
Good Riddance to Radical Boston College Prof Resigning over Condi
Somehow we had a feeling that the Boston College English prof, who was rash enough to resign in protest because the "liar" Condi Rice was going to be their graduation speaker, was radical in more than one direction. Steve Almond's wrote to BC's president: "I cannot, in good conscience, exhort my students to pursue truth and knowledge, then collect a paycheck from an institution that displays such flagrant disregard for both."
But are we to credit such a statement from a sex-obsessed professor of English who writes stories on "Anal Sex in Estonia" where we learn the French slang for sodomy? Is this what students get for $40,000+ per year at this Catholic university? We think BC will be much better off without this fellow teaching their students how to think and write as he does:
"Anal sex, if tactfully broached, must be made to seem sophisticated. This is accomplished, for instance, by referring to it in the French vernacular (e.g. touché du chocolat). Pain is expressed by means of different phonemes in Estonia. What sounds, to the Western ear, like a sharp moan of pleasure (phonetically: ouwhaahee) can be indicative of soft tissue trauma. Displays of affection are discouraged during the sex act."
But are we to credit such a statement from a sex-obsessed professor of English who writes stories on "Anal Sex in Estonia" where we learn the French slang for sodomy? Is this what students get for $40,000+ per year at this Catholic university? We think BC will be much better off without this fellow teaching their students how to think and write as he does:
"Anal sex, if tactfully broached, must be made to seem sophisticated. This is accomplished, for instance, by referring to it in the French vernacular (e.g. touché du chocolat). Pain is expressed by means of different phonemes in Estonia. What sounds, to the Western ear, like a sharp moan of pleasure (phonetically: ouwhaahee) can be indicative of soft tissue trauma. Displays of affection are discouraged during the sex act."
Friday, May 12, 2006
The Buck Still Stops with Gov. Romney on "Gay" Extremism in Mass.
Breaking News from the MassResistance website:
Article 8 / MassResistance presents sickening background of this weekend's "Youth Pride" event, by Governor's Commission for Gay & Lesbian Youth."
Gov. Romney reacts by taking steps to disband Commission -- but caves in to pressure from homosexual lobby. Instead, is asking gay activists running the commission to "refocus their resources." (Is this leadership?)
CLICK HERE to see some of what we presented to the Romney administration this week.
MassResistance has been very busy the past few days exposing the depths of depravity behind the so-called "safe schools" movement in Massachusetts. We've been in the Governor's office, forcing him to confront what the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" is really all about. At first, it appeared the Governor understood, and decided to disband the Commission yesterday. But then, he apparently decided he could work out some sort of compromise with the extremist homosexual movement.
MassResistance would like to remind the Governor that no compromise with evil is possible! We can't negotiate with the Islamic terrorists, which we hope he understands if he's elected President. And we can't compromise with domestic terrorists!
Keep tuned to this developing story at our website:
www.MassResistance.com
Also, see the AP story that ran last night, and the Boston Globe story from this morning.
Article 8 / MassResistance presents sickening background of this weekend's "Youth Pride" event, by Governor's Commission for Gay & Lesbian Youth."
Gov. Romney reacts by taking steps to disband Commission -- but caves in to pressure from homosexual lobby. Instead, is asking gay activists running the commission to "refocus their resources." (Is this leadership?)
CLICK HERE to see some of what we presented to the Romney administration this week.
MassResistance has been very busy the past few days exposing the depths of depravity behind the so-called "safe schools" movement in Massachusetts. We've been in the Governor's office, forcing him to confront what the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" is really all about. At first, it appeared the Governor understood, and decided to disband the Commission yesterday. But then, he apparently decided he could work out some sort of compromise with the extremist homosexual movement.
MassResistance would like to remind the Governor that no compromise with evil is possible! We can't negotiate with the Islamic terrorists, which we hope he understands if he's elected President. And we can't compromise with domestic terrorists!
Keep tuned to this developing story at our website:
www.MassResistance.com
Also, see the AP story that ran last night, and the Boston Globe story from this morning.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Homosexual Parenting: One Child's Experience
What does the Catholic Church mean when it says that homosexual parenting does violence to the children? Here's an interview with a woman raised by a homosexual father: Dawn Stefanowicz, interviewed by Gail Besse, in the National Catholic Register (May 10, 2006). Excerpts:
I’m speaking as a child who was not allowed to talk about what it’s like to grow up in a same-sex household. I loved my dad, and cared about his partners who have died of AIDS, so I can’t be politically correct. I have to speak up when legislation will inevitably put children at risk physically and psychologically.
Why doesn’t the public hear from more people in your situation?
It’s an extremely sensitive subject. It took me until I was in my late 20s to begin to deal with it. I haven’t met another adult child who didn’t love their parent, and often they won’t come forward until that parent has died. Sometimes the adult child won’t talk because they fear either hurting other family members or retribution from their own families.
What are your feelings toward your dad?
I came to deeply love and compassionately understand him before he died in 1991, sharing his life regrets with me. As a child, he had been sexually and physically abused by older males. He suffered from depression, anger, suicidal tendencies and sexual compulsions.
Do any incidents stick in your mind that you feel comfortable sharing?
We went to vacation spots that weren’t typical family places. One was a gay nude beach at Hanlan’s Point, Toronto, which often was raided by police, but now it’s legally “clothing optional.” By age 10, I was exposed to a sex shop and a gay cruising area. The boundaries between private and public sex were broken. There was cross-dressing, and gender-neutral aspects. I grew up feeling very confused about my own sexuality.
Read the complete interview.
I’m speaking as a child who was not allowed to talk about what it’s like to grow up in a same-sex household. I loved my dad, and cared about his partners who have died of AIDS, so I can’t be politically correct. I have to speak up when legislation will inevitably put children at risk physically and psychologically.
Why doesn’t the public hear from more people in your situation?
It’s an extremely sensitive subject. It took me until I was in my late 20s to begin to deal with it. I haven’t met another adult child who didn’t love their parent, and often they won’t come forward until that parent has died. Sometimes the adult child won’t talk because they fear either hurting other family members or retribution from their own families.
What are your feelings toward your dad?
I came to deeply love and compassionately understand him before he died in 1991, sharing his life regrets with me. As a child, he had been sexually and physically abused by older males. He suffered from depression, anger, suicidal tendencies and sexual compulsions.
Do any incidents stick in your mind that you feel comfortable sharing?
We went to vacation spots that weren’t typical family places. One was a gay nude beach at Hanlan’s Point, Toronto, which often was raided by police, but now it’s legally “clothing optional.” By age 10, I was exposed to a sex shop and a gay cruising area. The boundaries between private and public sex were broken. There was cross-dressing, and gender-neutral aspects. I grew up feeling very confused about my own sexuality.
Read the complete interview.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
MassResistance Trip to ConCon Cancelled!
Now why would Senate President Travaglini go and cancel the Constitutional Convention, scheduled for tomorrow, May 10? Pressing budgetary matters? Or is it running out the clock on the VoteOnMarriage referendum petition? ("Waiting for the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling on whether the petition is Constitutional"... Sure!)
We were looking forward to paying $20 for parking and remembering to leave our Swiss Army knife, mace, etc. behind so we could get through the State House security tomorrow! We really wanted to see what Cambridge Sen. Jarrett ("married to another man") Barrios had up his sleeve with OUR H653, the pure definition of marriage which WE filed to become a statute (NOT an amendment) -- and Barrios illegally, surreptitiously turned into a proposed Constitutional amendment! Was he somehow going to scuttle the VoteOnMarriage's amendment through the device of the mutated H653? Well, we just have to wait until July to find out.
Lawmakers postpone constitutional convention until July
May 9, 2006 - Associated Press
BOSTON -- Lawmakers will wait until July to consider several proposedconstitutional amendments, including making health care access a right andoutlawing gay marriage.
Senate President Robert Travaglini said Tuesday that the constitutional convention scheduled for Wednesday would be postponed because the Senate iscurrently preparing its budget and advancing "other important initiatives." "It would be prudent to postpone the constitutional convention until a later date in July," he said in a statement.
The Supreme Judicial Court is currently weighing a lawsuit by gay marriage activists which could make the proposed gay marriage constitutional amendment moot. The amendment would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, but gay marriage supporters argue that it would violate the state constitution, which bars any citizen-initiated amendment that seeks to reverse a judicial ruling.
We were looking forward to paying $20 for parking and remembering to leave our Swiss Army knife, mace, etc. behind so we could get through the State House security tomorrow! We really wanted to see what Cambridge Sen. Jarrett ("married to another man") Barrios had up his sleeve with OUR H653, the pure definition of marriage which WE filed to become a statute (NOT an amendment) -- and Barrios illegally, surreptitiously turned into a proposed Constitutional amendment! Was he somehow going to scuttle the VoteOnMarriage's amendment through the device of the mutated H653? Well, we just have to wait until July to find out.
Lawmakers postpone constitutional convention until July
May 9, 2006 - Associated Press
BOSTON -- Lawmakers will wait until July to consider several proposedconstitutional amendments, including making health care access a right andoutlawing gay marriage.
Senate President Robert Travaglini said Tuesday that the constitutional convention scheduled for Wednesday would be postponed because the Senate iscurrently preparing its budget and advancing "other important initiatives." "It would be prudent to postpone the constitutional convention until a later date in July," he said in a statement.
The Supreme Judicial Court is currently weighing a lawsuit by gay marriage activists which could make the proposed gay marriage constitutional amendment moot. The amendment would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, but gay marriage supporters argue that it would violate the state constitution, which bars any citizen-initiated amendment that seeks to reverse a judicial ruling.
Job Opening with "Gay" Activist Rep. Carl Sciortino
Rep. Carl Sciortino, openly homosexual legislator from Somerville and Medford, is looking for a legislative aide. He will not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation! So go ahead, MassResistance fans, apply! One of the job responsibilities is to "Ensure the office is kept clean." This is from a fellow who, as an undergraduate GLBT activist at Tufts, helped run anal lubricant seminars. He's also notorious for his part in QueerToday's disruption of Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston, protesting the Church's stand against "homosexual marriage."
Hello,
I want to inform you of a job opening in my office for the position of Legislative Aide. The Legislative Aide is responsible for overseeing all day-to-day legislative, office, and constituent work. ... People of all sexual orientations [does this include pedophilia and bestiality?] and gender identities [i.e., "beyond binary"], people of color and people with disabilities are encouraged to apply.
Preference for people who are bilingual, who reside in Medford or Somerville, who are able to be occasionally flexible with work hours, and those with prior political or community organizing experience. If you are interested in applying, please send a resume, cover letter, and a writing sample by Friday, May 19th. They can be sent via email to brooks.daverman@state.ma.us, or mailed to Office of State Representative Carl Sciortino, Statehouse, Rm. 39, Boston, MA 02133. Please share this with anyone who you think might be interested.
Thank you,
Carl Sciortino
State Representative 34th Middlesex District
(617) 722-2014
Rep.CarlSciortino@Hou.State.MA.US
Hello,
I want to inform you of a job opening in my office for the position of Legislative Aide. The Legislative Aide is responsible for overseeing all day-to-day legislative, office, and constituent work. ... People of all sexual orientations [does this include pedophilia and bestiality?] and gender identities [i.e., "beyond binary"], people of color and people with disabilities are encouraged to apply.
Preference for people who are bilingual, who reside in Medford or Somerville, who are able to be occasionally flexible with work hours, and those with prior political or community organizing experience. If you are interested in applying, please send a resume, cover letter, and a writing sample by Friday, May 19th. They can be sent via email to brooks.daverman@state.ma.us, or mailed to Office of State Representative Carl Sciortino, Statehouse, Rm. 39, Boston, MA 02133. Please share this with anyone who you think might be interested.
Thank you,
Carl Sciortino
State Representative 34th Middlesex District
(617) 722-2014
Rep.CarlSciortino@Hou.State.MA.US
Monday, May 08, 2006
Governor Romney Instituted "Gay Marriage" in Massachusetts
We've gotten some interesting responses to two recent postings: Proof: Homosexual "Marriage" Still Not Legal in Massachusetts and "Surrender with Dignity" Conservatives. So for more along these lines:
We're all involved in an elaborate "Emperor-Has-No Clothes" charade, informed parties knowing full well that homosexual "marriage" is still not legal. As in the fairy tale, most -- but not all of us -- are keeping quiet. And the fantasy is being played out due only to the unilateral actions of Governor Romney. He ordered the printing of "Partner A/Partner B" marriage licenses, and ordered that all Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks cooperate with the fantasy of "marrying" homosexual partners. He did not have to do this. The Court did not order him to do so, and there was in fact no "homosexual marriage" LAW he had to uphold!
Let's go back to a news story that appeared on the day of the Goodridge ruling (Nov. 18, 2003) from our venerable Supreme Judicial Court. Before all the spin began, WCVB News Center 5 in Boston reported:
State's Highest Court Says 'Yes' To Gay Marriage
Legislature Has 180 Days To Decide On Amending Constitution
[Note: It does not say that Gov. Romney has 180 days to decide!]
M.R.F. Buckley, Staff Writer
POSTED: 10:34 am EST November 18, 2003
UPDATED: 6:35 am EST November 19, 2003
BOSTON -- Massachusetts highest court ruled Tuesday that it is illegal under the state's constitution to ban gay marriages, but left it up to the state Legislature to decide how the state will amend its Constitution to legalize gay marriages or unions. [Note: The Court ordered the Legislature -- not the Governor -- to act. The Court had NOT legalized "gay marriages", but recognized the Legislature as the branch which must do so. Though whether the Court even had this authority to order the Legislature is another question!]
... The SJC ruled in a 4-3 decision that the Legislature now has 180 days to act on the state's Constitution. ... The court went on to say that it's up to the Legislature to decide whether same sex couples can legally marry in the state. "We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution ... Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion." [And if the Legislature did nothing, what could the Court do to enforce its ruling?]
Gov. Mitt Romney, who opposes gay marriage, offered swift reaction. He said he will do everything he can to prevent gay marriages in the state, saying he disagreed with the SJC decision and will put forth an amendment to limit the legal definition of marriage in the state. [But Romney, while at first appearing to recognize that legislative action was required, went on to facilitate "homosexual marriage" without any legislative action! Filing an amendment to protect marriage is a far cry from printing licenses and issuing orders for "homosexual marriages" to commence, which Romney did do in May 2004.]
"Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman and the exact equivalent to marriage is also reserved to a man and a woman. Over the next several months I'll work together with Legislative leadership and other legislators and community leaders to decide what kind of statute we can fashion which is consistent with the law. We obviously have to follow the law as provided by the Supreme Judicial Court, even if we don't agree with it, we're going to follow it in terms of preparing legislation and we'll have legislation which conforms to the law. [What "law"? There was only a court ruling! If there were already "law" handed down by the Court, why would the Legislature have to act?] But we will, at the same time, initiate a constitutional amendment process, and that constitutional amendment process will be consistent with what I think the feelings are of the people of the commonwealth, and of course, the entire sweep of recorded history," said Romney. ...
"This is sounding an awful lot like Vermont," said David Yas of Lawyer's Weekly. "The SJC stopped short of giving a blanket rights of all gay couples to marry and instead sending it to the Legislature for what will ultimately be some sort of compromise. In Vermont, this is more or less what happened." Yas predicted Massachusetts could ultimately end up with a civil union law for gays, similar to what Vermont approved. ... [Yas recognized that only the Legislature was called upon by the Court to act, and that the Court did not implement "gay marriage".]
We're all involved in an elaborate "Emperor-Has-No Clothes" charade, informed parties knowing full well that homosexual "marriage" is still not legal. As in the fairy tale, most -- but not all of us -- are keeping quiet. And the fantasy is being played out due only to the unilateral actions of Governor Romney. He ordered the printing of "Partner A/Partner B" marriage licenses, and ordered that all Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks cooperate with the fantasy of "marrying" homosexual partners. He did not have to do this. The Court did not order him to do so, and there was in fact no "homosexual marriage" LAW he had to uphold!
Let's go back to a news story that appeared on the day of the Goodridge ruling (Nov. 18, 2003) from our venerable Supreme Judicial Court. Before all the spin began, WCVB News Center 5 in Boston reported:
State's Highest Court Says 'Yes' To Gay Marriage
Legislature Has 180 Days To Decide On Amending Constitution
[Note: It does not say that Gov. Romney has 180 days to decide!]
M.R.F. Buckley, Staff Writer
POSTED: 10:34 am EST November 18, 2003
UPDATED: 6:35 am EST November 19, 2003
BOSTON -- Massachusetts highest court ruled Tuesday that it is illegal under the state's constitution to ban gay marriages, but left it up to the state Legislature to decide how the state will amend its Constitution to legalize gay marriages or unions. [Note: The Court ordered the Legislature -- not the Governor -- to act. The Court had NOT legalized "gay marriages", but recognized the Legislature as the branch which must do so. Though whether the Court even had this authority to order the Legislature is another question!]
... The SJC ruled in a 4-3 decision that the Legislature now has 180 days to act on the state's Constitution. ... The court went on to say that it's up to the Legislature to decide whether same sex couples can legally marry in the state. "We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution ... Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion." [And if the Legislature did nothing, what could the Court do to enforce its ruling?]
Gov. Mitt Romney, who opposes gay marriage, offered swift reaction. He said he will do everything he can to prevent gay marriages in the state, saying he disagreed with the SJC decision and will put forth an amendment to limit the legal definition of marriage in the state. [But Romney, while at first appearing to recognize that legislative action was required, went on to facilitate "homosexual marriage" without any legislative action! Filing an amendment to protect marriage is a far cry from printing licenses and issuing orders for "homosexual marriages" to commence, which Romney did do in May 2004.]
"Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman and the exact equivalent to marriage is also reserved to a man and a woman. Over the next several months I'll work together with Legislative leadership and other legislators and community leaders to decide what kind of statute we can fashion which is consistent with the law. We obviously have to follow the law as provided by the Supreme Judicial Court, even if we don't agree with it, we're going to follow it in terms of preparing legislation and we'll have legislation which conforms to the law. [What "law"? There was only a court ruling! If there were already "law" handed down by the Court, why would the Legislature have to act?] But we will, at the same time, initiate a constitutional amendment process, and that constitutional amendment process will be consistent with what I think the feelings are of the people of the commonwealth, and of course, the entire sweep of recorded history," said Romney. ...
"This is sounding an awful lot like Vermont," said David Yas of Lawyer's Weekly. "The SJC stopped short of giving a blanket rights of all gay couples to marry and instead sending it to the Legislature for what will ultimately be some sort of compromise. In Vermont, this is more or less what happened." Yas predicted Massachusetts could ultimately end up with a civil union law for gays, similar to what Vermont approved. ... [Yas recognized that only the Legislature was called upon by the Court to act, and that the Court did not implement "gay marriage".]
Sunday, May 07, 2006
The Buck Stops with Gov. Romney: BAGLY's Gay/Trans Parade & Prom
Foxy Cleopatra at Youth Pride 2005
"Prom Queens" at the BAGLY Queer/Trans Prom, Boston City Hall, May 2005
[Photos credit: BAGLY.org]
The Youth Pride parade hits the streets of Boston next Saturday, May 13. That evening, the BAGLY queer/trans prom will be held at Boston City Hall.
Massachusetts Governors have issued proclamations supporting the Youth Pride event every year -- that is, until Article 8/MassResistance sent a little communication to Governor Romney's office last year. While he had issued a proclamation his first year in office, he declined to proclaim "Youth Pride Day" his second year.
Sadly, we see that this year the Youth Pride group has been allowed to issue an official press release from the Governor's office, under the "authority" of the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth." The Governor's name and seal are at the top of the page. The buck stops with him. Why did he allow this? Will he step in to stop this horrible event?
The press release says: " 'One of the goals of Youth Pride is to unite the very diverse youth from across Massachusetts and beyond, and celebrate the wisdom, love and courage they have gained throughout their lives so far,' says Mass Youth Pride Committee member Timothy James Gallant." The event will feature "Gender Crash" in their "Words of Wisdom" segment. [Gender Crash calls itself the "intersection of Boston's queer, transgender, and gender queer communities."]
From the Mass Youth Pride announcement: On Saturday, May 13th the MA Youth Pride Committee will transform the Boston Common into “Rainbow City” for the 12th Annual Youth Pride Celebration.
In celebration of their lives and diversity, GLBTQ youth and their supporters will gather by the thousands to kick off Massachusetts' 12th annual Youth Pride and this year’s event promises to be a smash!
The day will be hosted by drag king Heywood Wakefield (Aliza Shapiro) and the schedule is as follows:
12pm- Rally at the Parkman Bandstand on Boston Common with featured speakers on the topics of Wisdom, Love and Courage. Awards in those same categories will be presented to people who have been an inspiration to the GLBTQ community.
Following the rally, the Boston Women's Rainbow Chorus will perform numbers from The Wizard of Oz and The Wiz as our 'Lollipop Kids' prepare to set off along the red-brick Freedom Trail, past the golden 'Oz-like' dome of the Massachusetts State House and through the streets of Downtown Boston. [Yes, they've transformed our state into a fantasy-world freak show.]
Upon returning to the Common, the celebration will continue with a music and resource festival. The festival will feature interactive games and activities as well as a chance to purchase goods from various vendors, including some of our very own youth vendors.
Admission to this event is free.
Youth Pride is the oldest and largest event for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer youth and their allies in the nation. [A big thanks to Gov. William Weld!] A youth driven and youth organized event, this year's Youth Pride theme- "Rainbow City"- was chosen by the Massachusetts Youth Pride Committee to celebrate the diverse identities and shared spirit of GLBTQ youth. The MAYPC invites everyone to come and support GLBTQ youth while discovering that there is no place like Youth Pride!
For more information please contact Event Coordinator, Keri Aulita, at
ypcoordinator@hotmail.com or Youth Coordinator, Kelly Lydon, at kelly.lydon@state.ma.us.Or visit www.massyouthpride.org.
Saturday, May 06, 2006
Gay & Lesbian Bar Association: "As Queer as It Gets"
[Warning: Lots of lavender links in this one!]
Try as we might, we keep missing gala events! First it was PFLAG's back-to-back fundraisers, then we missed the 26th anniversary celebration for BAGLY, honoring Rep. Alice Wolf of Cambridge (who recently tried to sneak by a bill requiring sex ed/homosex ed indoctrination from the earliest grades).
Now we find out too late that we could have attended the annual Mass. Gay & Lesbian Bar Association Dinner. ("MLGBA promotes the administration of justice throughout Massachusetts for all persons without regard to their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression." And that just about covers everything.) This was the group SJC Chief Justice Margaret Marshall promised to support back in 1999, appearing as their keynote speaker. She then went on to keep her promise. All highly unethical and contrary to the Code of Judicial Conduct, of course. (But this is Massachusetts...)
The keynote speaker at the MGLBA dinner, one Rachel Maddow, "is queer, very queer," according to our very queer source. She's apparently on MSNBC nightly at 11pm with Tucker Carlson (but who with a normal life can stay up that late?). Mark, at our very queer source, writes:
Rachel's keynote speech was important for the gay community of Massachusetts to hear. She spoke about our need to fight back against an administration that ignores the rule of law, rather than wasting our time responding to attacks from Rick Santorum. She said we should be proud to be different, proud to be a minority, and not obsess over assimilating. "We will never be normal," she yelled. [emphasis added]
After the event Rachel talked with Jenn ["a queer femme"] and I [sic] about how she agrees that if we look at all of our struggles through the singular lense of gay marriage it will hurt us as a community, we must broaded [sic] our scope and form coalitions.
Grace Sterling Stowell also gave an inspiring speech in which she encouraged the audience to think about the needs of LGBT Youth and the Trans Community who are so often forgotten by the mainstream gay community. [Check out "her" speech at last year's GLSEN conference!]
Larry Kessler also received an award. Larry has been an anti-war activist, founded organizations to feed the hunger and shelter the poor, and founded the Aids Action Committee of Massachusetts [publisher of the Little Black Book].
Overall the speeches and awardees were as queer as it gets.
Try as we might, we keep missing gala events! First it was PFLAG's back-to-back fundraisers, then we missed the 26th anniversary celebration for BAGLY, honoring Rep. Alice Wolf of Cambridge (who recently tried to sneak by a bill requiring sex ed/homosex ed indoctrination from the earliest grades).
Now we find out too late that we could have attended the annual Mass. Gay & Lesbian Bar Association Dinner. ("MLGBA promotes the administration of justice throughout Massachusetts for all persons without regard to their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression." And that just about covers everything.) This was the group SJC Chief Justice Margaret Marshall promised to support back in 1999, appearing as their keynote speaker. She then went on to keep her promise. All highly unethical and contrary to the Code of Judicial Conduct, of course. (But this is Massachusetts...)
The keynote speaker at the MGLBA dinner, one Rachel Maddow, "is queer, very queer," according to our very queer source. She's apparently on MSNBC nightly at 11pm with Tucker Carlson (but who with a normal life can stay up that late?). Mark, at our very queer source, writes:
Rachel's keynote speech was important for the gay community of Massachusetts to hear. She spoke about our need to fight back against an administration that ignores the rule of law, rather than wasting our time responding to attacks from Rick Santorum. She said we should be proud to be different, proud to be a minority, and not obsess over assimilating. "We will never be normal," she yelled. [emphasis added]
After the event Rachel talked with Jenn ["a queer femme"] and I [sic] about how she agrees that if we look at all of our struggles through the singular lense of gay marriage it will hurt us as a community, we must broaded [sic] our scope and form coalitions.
Grace Sterling Stowell also gave an inspiring speech in which she encouraged the audience to think about the needs of LGBT Youth and the Trans Community who are so often forgotten by the mainstream gay community. [Check out "her" speech at last year's GLSEN conference!]
Larry Kessler also received an award. Larry has been an anti-war activist, founded organizations to feed the hunger and shelter the poor, and founded the Aids Action Committee of Massachusetts [publisher of the Little Black Book].
Overall the speeches and awardees were as queer as it gets.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
"King and King" About "Family"? NO...
It was already a stretch when GLBTQIP activists claimed that "Who's In a Family?" (the book that triggered the David Parker's concern) was only about "different kinds of families." But how are families with children created except through sex? (Leaving aside that non-hetero parents now have unethical doctors willing to artificially inseminate, no matter what the parent profile is ...)
So we say even "Who's In a Family?" is about human sexuality, because when a young child from a normal background is forced to focus on two mommies or two daddies with their children, they will naturally find it strange. Then their thoughts inevitably move on to how two mommies or two daddies can make babies. "Do they kiss like my mommy and daddy? Do they sleep together?", etc. But it's still not about sex, say the GLBTQIPs!
But now the GLBTQIPs are really pushing it. "King and King", the latest tool of indoctrination in the Lexington schools, is about two young princes who fall in love and get "married." It is "not about sex but about family," they still say.
But where, we ask, are the two kings' children? Is a male couple engaging in sodomy a "family"? Is that all that the word "family" now requires? How is this book about "different kinds of families" that children see in their own neighborhoods? The only reference to "family" in this story book is the strained relationship between the prince his mother, the chattering, overbearing queen. (Very interesting. No father around, a nagging mother he can't stand ... but that's a topic for another day.)
So we say even "Who's In a Family?" is about human sexuality, because when a young child from a normal background is forced to focus on two mommies or two daddies with their children, they will naturally find it strange. Then their thoughts inevitably move on to how two mommies or two daddies can make babies. "Do they kiss like my mommy and daddy? Do they sleep together?", etc. But it's still not about sex, say the GLBTQIPs!
But now the GLBTQIPs are really pushing it. "King and King", the latest tool of indoctrination in the Lexington schools, is about two young princes who fall in love and get "married." It is "not about sex but about family," they still say.
But where, we ask, are the two kings' children? Is a male couple engaging in sodomy a "family"? Is that all that the word "family" now requires? How is this book about "different kinds of families" that children see in their own neighborhoods? The only reference to "family" in this story book is the strained relationship between the prince his mother, the chattering, overbearing queen. (Very interesting. No father around, a nagging mother he can't stand ... but that's a topic for another day.)
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Proof: Homosexual "Marriage" Still Not Legal in Massachusetts
Still don't get it? Look at these two bills pending in the Massachusetts legislature:
[Filed by the homosexual lobby:]
H977 / S967 (Still in Judiciary Committee) -- Would "officially" legalize homosexual marriage. The homosexual lobby apparently realizes that the SJC decision did not actually change any law. Thus, they want to make it "official" law -- which it ISN'T now!
An Act TO PROTECT MASSACHUSETTS FAMILIES THROUGH EQUAL ACCESS TO CIVIL MARRIAGE. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 207 is hereby amended by adding the following new section:
Section 37A. Any person who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of this chapter may marry any other eligible person regardless of gender.
[Filed by MassResistance:]
H654 (Still in Judiciary Committee) -- Nullification of same-sex "marriages".
An ACT TO CLARIFY THE STATUS OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGES PERFORMED UNDER PUBLIC AUTHORITY IN MASSACHUSETTS SINCE MAY 17, 2004. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
It is hereby declared that all same-sex marriages performed under public authority in Massachusetts since May 17, 2004 are without statutory basis; and no marriage performed in Massachusetts will be considered legally binding which is not established by Massachusetts statute, not withstanding licensing through the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, or city or town clerk.
[Filed by the homosexual lobby:]
H977 / S967 (Still in Judiciary Committee) -- Would "officially" legalize homosexual marriage. The homosexual lobby apparently realizes that the SJC decision did not actually change any law. Thus, they want to make it "official" law -- which it ISN'T now!
An Act TO PROTECT MASSACHUSETTS FAMILIES THROUGH EQUAL ACCESS TO CIVIL MARRIAGE. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 207 is hereby amended by adding the following new section:
Section 37A. Any person who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of this chapter may marry any other eligible person regardless of gender.
[Filed by MassResistance:]
H654 (Still in Judiciary Committee) -- Nullification of same-sex "marriages".
An ACT TO CLARIFY THE STATUS OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGES PERFORMED UNDER PUBLIC AUTHORITY IN MASSACHUSETTS SINCE MAY 17, 2004. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
It is hereby declared that all same-sex marriages performed under public authority in Massachusetts since May 17, 2004 are without statutory basis; and no marriage performed in Massachusetts will be considered legally binding which is not established by Massachusetts statute, not withstanding licensing through the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, or city or town clerk.
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
How Many Homosexuals Really Want to "Marry"?
Is the demand for homosexual "marriage" a disingenuous political tool? Only a small percentage of the estimated homosexual populations in the Netherlands, Belgium, or Massachusetts have "married". Bear in mind that Massachusetts is a "magnet" state for homosexuals who do want to "marry" in this country. (And note that the story inaccurately reports that such "marriage" is "legal" in Massachusetts.)
Apr 26, 2006
Study Assesses How Many Gays Marry if Legal
By DAVID CRARYAP National Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- A new study attempts to gauge the percentage of gays and lesbians who have chosen to marry in places where that option is legal, with estimates ranging from as little as 2 percent to more than 16 percent, depending on the location.
A co-author of the report, released Wednesday, said both sides in the gay marriage debate may take heart from the findings.
The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, which opposes gay marriage, reviewed data from the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and Massachusetts, all of which allow same-sex partners to wed.
In each case, the study offered a range of estimates of the percentage of gays who had married, based on varying approximations - from 1 percent to 5 percent - of how many gays were in the general population.
In the Netherlands, where 8,127 same-sex couples married from April 1, 2001, through last December, the study said this represented between 2.6 percent and 6.3 percent of the country's gays and lesbians.
The study estimated that between 2 percent and 5 percent of Belgium's gays and lesbians, and 5.9 percent to 16.7 percent of those in Massachusetts had married. Same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in May 2004, and 7,341 gay and lesbians couples had wed there through last December. [Read more ...]
Apr 26, 2006
Study Assesses How Many Gays Marry if Legal
By DAVID CRARYAP National Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- A new study attempts to gauge the percentage of gays and lesbians who have chosen to marry in places where that option is legal, with estimates ranging from as little as 2 percent to more than 16 percent, depending on the location.
A co-author of the report, released Wednesday, said both sides in the gay marriage debate may take heart from the findings.
The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, which opposes gay marriage, reviewed data from the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and Massachusetts, all of which allow same-sex partners to wed.
In each case, the study offered a range of estimates of the percentage of gays who had married, based on varying approximations - from 1 percent to 5 percent - of how many gays were in the general population.
In the Netherlands, where 8,127 same-sex couples married from April 1, 2001, through last December, the study said this represented between 2.6 percent and 6.3 percent of the country's gays and lesbians.
The study estimated that between 2 percent and 5 percent of Belgium's gays and lesbians, and 5.9 percent to 16.7 percent of those in Massachusetts had married. Same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in May 2004, and 7,341 gay and lesbians couples had wed there through last December. [Read more ...]
Monday, May 01, 2006
Brave New World = Fatherless Children
The world of the future. Single-mom households, children with no father. Two-mom households, children with no father. And don't forget the two-dad households who somehow adopt children who will know no mother. From the Family Research Council:
Life Without Father
The tykes' smiling pictures confront us in today's Washington Post. They are the children of "Donor 401." He is a German, we know, and he's a sperm donor who has fathered at least 25 children--that we know of. Fairfax (VA) Cryobank is proud of its role in this project. Still anonymous, Donor 401 is nonetheless a hot commodity on TV talk shows. The kids shown appear to be blond, blue-eyed.
Women who have been inseminated with his sperm have appeared with Meredith Vieira on "The View." The "Today" show featured a story on this phenomenon. And Comedy Central's Steve Colbert claimed facetiously to be Donor 401. "Obviously, the kids will ask questions someday," said one of the women who set up an online registry to link up the children who are biologically half-brothers and sisters, "and having this connection will help." Oh yes, they will definitely ask questions someday. And some of these parents may not be entirely prepared to answer.
We used to view with horror the idea of intentionally depriving children of a relationship with their father--and with their brothers and sisters. Now it has become almost a sport, a lark, a subject for daytime TV talk show fun. It is a direct and dehumanizing attack on the family.
Life Without Father
The tykes' smiling pictures confront us in today's Washington Post. They are the children of "Donor 401." He is a German, we know, and he's a sperm donor who has fathered at least 25 children--that we know of. Fairfax (VA) Cryobank is proud of its role in this project. Still anonymous, Donor 401 is nonetheless a hot commodity on TV talk shows. The kids shown appear to be blond, blue-eyed.
Women who have been inseminated with his sperm have appeared with Meredith Vieira on "The View." The "Today" show featured a story on this phenomenon. And Comedy Central's Steve Colbert claimed facetiously to be Donor 401. "Obviously, the kids will ask questions someday," said one of the women who set up an online registry to link up the children who are biologically half-brothers and sisters, "and having this connection will help." Oh yes, they will definitely ask questions someday. And some of these parents may not be entirely prepared to answer.
We used to view with horror the idea of intentionally depriving children of a relationship with their father--and with their brothers and sisters. Now it has become almost a sport, a lark, a subject for daytime TV talk show fun. It is a direct and dehumanizing attack on the family.
Mushy Republicans Again
John Haskins has another excellent article on mushy Republicans and conservatives who can't face the truth, this time on Alan Keyes' website, Renew America:
"Bush DID make history on the White House lawn...and every politically astute liberal knows it."
By John Haskins (April 29, 2006)
More denial, folks. As always, every politically aware liberal and homosexual activist in the country knows what many on "Our Side" have scrambled to deny. Here's a little reality pill to nibble on: another incremental surrender DID occur and history WAS made in this White House Easter Egg Roll, in an almost irreversible way. Homosexuals, bearing their trophy children — helpless prisoners in the War Against Future Generations — were welcomed without so much as blink of an eye at a family event on a high Christian holy day.
Make no mistake: those who plot and scheme tirelessly against the innocence of our children, and against our rights as parents to defend them and who have sworn enmity against our God, know that they won that Easter egg roll and we lost. No, once again, we didn't lose. We surrendered. Our specialty. And we then chastised those among us who warned against one more polite, quiet, peaceful, dignified, lazy, little surrender.
Why don't pro-family people understand how much the "little" things like this advance society's acceptance of homosexual "families," homosexual child rearing and homosexual "marriages?" How blind can we be? ...
[Read more ...]
"Bush DID make history on the White House lawn...and every politically astute liberal knows it."
By John Haskins (April 29, 2006)
More denial, folks. As always, every politically aware liberal and homosexual activist in the country knows what many on "Our Side" have scrambled to deny. Here's a little reality pill to nibble on: another incremental surrender DID occur and history WAS made in this White House Easter Egg Roll, in an almost irreversible way. Homosexuals, bearing their trophy children — helpless prisoners in the War Against Future Generations — were welcomed without so much as blink of an eye at a family event on a high Christian holy day.
Make no mistake: those who plot and scheme tirelessly against the innocence of our children, and against our rights as parents to defend them and who have sworn enmity against our God, know that they won that Easter egg roll and we lost. No, once again, we didn't lose. We surrendered. Our specialty. And we then chastised those among us who warned against one more polite, quiet, peaceful, dignified, lazy, little surrender.
Why don't pro-family people understand how much the "little" things like this advance society's acceptance of homosexual "families," homosexual child rearing and homosexual "marriages?" How blind can we be? ...
[Read more ...]
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Shame on Mass. Republicans
From MassResistance's reporter at the state Republican convention today, Saturday, April 29.
The Massachusetts Republican Party is at its weakest ever. This is because they are not Republicans any more. Shame on the party leadership. They have clearly joined the Culture of Death, proclaiming their pro-abortion stance -- even celebrating it at a cocktail party! And the state committee allowed sodomy "marriage" advocates to have an information table at Saturday's state party convention.
MassEquality passing out its propaganda at a Republican convention!? Bad enough that in 2004, Republican candidates were instructed to avoid the issue of homosexual "marriage". But now the party is apparently welcoming MassEquality's message. No -- a party convention is not a free speech zone. Exhibitors should be in accord with the principles of the party. Does the Massachusetts Republican Party now officially support homosexual "marriage"?! We'll have to check on this...
Planned Parenthood also had a table at the convention. And at the end of the day on Saturday, "Republicans for Choice" threw a cocktail reception. Here's the flyer that was circulating:
Immediately following the Republican Convention
Join the Massachusetts Coalition for Choice at the kick-off event for the
MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICANS FOR CHOICE
Keynote Speaker: Lieutenant Governor and Gubernatorial Candidate Kerry Healey
Other Speakers:
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Darlee Crockett, National Co-chair of Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
SATURDAY APRIL 29th 2006, 2pm (or end of convention if later) Brewery exchange, 3rd floor Playloft: 201 Cabot St. in Lowell
- light hors d'oeuvres served - cash bar
EVENT HOST COMMITTEE
Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Governor William F. Weld
Governor Argeo Paul Cellucci
The Honorable Jane Swift
Darlee Crockett, national Co-chair, Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
Massachusetts State Senator Brian Lees
Massachusetts State Senator Richard Tisei
Massachusetts State Rep0resentative Karyn Polito
Massachusetts State Representative Mary Rogeness
Massachusetts State Representative Sue Pope
Massachusetts State Representative Virginia Coppola
The Honorable Jody Dow
The Honorable Patrick Guerriero
Sarah Chamberlain Resnick, Executive Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Jonathan Stevens, Public Policy Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Ann Blackham, Ann Murphy, Bill Saltonstall, Jenny Armini, Lucile P. Hicks, Lyman Wood, Nancy J. Luther, Polly Logan, William Sawyer
The Massachusetts Republican Party is at its weakest ever. This is because they are not Republicans any more. Shame on the party leadership. They have clearly joined the Culture of Death, proclaiming their pro-abortion stance -- even celebrating it at a cocktail party! And the state committee allowed sodomy "marriage" advocates to have an information table at Saturday's state party convention.
MassEquality passing out its propaganda at a Republican convention!? Bad enough that in 2004, Republican candidates were instructed to avoid the issue of homosexual "marriage". But now the party is apparently welcoming MassEquality's message. No -- a party convention is not a free speech zone. Exhibitors should be in accord with the principles of the party. Does the Massachusetts Republican Party now officially support homosexual "marriage"?! We'll have to check on this...
Planned Parenthood also had a table at the convention. And at the end of the day on Saturday, "Republicans for Choice" threw a cocktail reception. Here's the flyer that was circulating:
Immediately following the Republican Convention
Join the Massachusetts Coalition for Choice at the kick-off event for the
MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICANS FOR CHOICE
Keynote Speaker: Lieutenant Governor and Gubernatorial Candidate Kerry Healey
Other Speakers:
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Darlee Crockett, National Co-chair of Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
SATURDAY APRIL 29th 2006, 2pm (or end of convention if later) Brewery exchange, 3rd floor Playloft: 201 Cabot St. in Lowell
- light hors d'oeuvres served - cash bar
EVENT HOST COMMITTEE
Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Governor William F. Weld
Governor Argeo Paul Cellucci
The Honorable Jane Swift
Darlee Crockett, national Co-chair, Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
Massachusetts State Senator Brian Lees
Massachusetts State Senator Richard Tisei
Massachusetts State Rep0resentative Karyn Polito
Massachusetts State Representative Mary Rogeness
Massachusetts State Representative Sue Pope
Massachusetts State Representative Virginia Coppola
The Honorable Jody Dow
The Honorable Patrick Guerriero
Sarah Chamberlain Resnick, Executive Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Jonathan Stevens, Public Policy Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Ann Blackham, Ann Murphy, Bill Saltonstall, Jenny Armini, Lucile P. Hicks, Lyman Wood, Nancy J. Luther, Polly Logan, William Sawyer
Thursday, April 27, 2006
MR Editor Attends Real Wedding!
We'll be taking a few days off to attend a REAL wedding on the West Coast-- one man + one woman. Back on Monday.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
School Risk Audit: Are Your Schools Promoting Homosexuality?
Parents and community members need to document exactly what's happening in their own schools. Here's a tool which might help.
From Robert Knight at the Culture & Family Institute of Concerned Women for America: Groups Endorse ‘School Risk Audit’ to Expose ‘Gay’ Agenda in Schools (4/25/06).
Are your local schools promoting homosexuality? There’s a new way to find out.
A coalition of pro-family groups is urging parents to do a “School Risk Audit” to determine whether and how the schools have become conduits for homosexual activism.
Concerned Women for America (CWA) has joined with Mission America, American Family Association, Citizens for Community Values, Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, Americans for Truth, Exodus Mandate, and several state organizations (see below at end of article) to recommend a “School Risk Audit” inspired by a resolution passed in 2005 by the Southern Baptist Convention and developed by Mission America President Linda Harvey.
Parents can download the audit form and use any portion they wish or the entire document. The Audit includes recommendations for parental action in the wake of the survey, such as how to alert school authorities and how to issue a press release.
From Robert Knight at the Culture & Family Institute of Concerned Women for America: Groups Endorse ‘School Risk Audit’ to Expose ‘Gay’ Agenda in Schools (4/25/06).
Are your local schools promoting homosexuality? There’s a new way to find out.
A coalition of pro-family groups is urging parents to do a “School Risk Audit” to determine whether and how the schools have become conduits for homosexual activism.
Concerned Women for America (CWA) has joined with Mission America, American Family Association, Citizens for Community Values, Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, Americans for Truth, Exodus Mandate, and several state organizations (see below at end of article) to recommend a “School Risk Audit” inspired by a resolution passed in 2005 by the Southern Baptist Convention and developed by Mission America President Linda Harvey.
Parents can download the audit form and use any portion they wish or the entire document. The Audit includes recommendations for parental action in the wake of the survey, such as how to alert school authorities and how to issue a press release.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Schools' Legal Liability in Promoting Homosexual Sex
Schools across America are going to start experiencing lawsuits over their criminal seduction of our young people into the unhealthy GLBT "lifestyle". Check out this resource from PFOX (Parents & Friends of ExGays & Gays). It makes a great gift for your local school committee, superintendent, and principal.
"The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools: An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior in public schools." Topics include:
-Endangering the physical health of a child (STDs, HPV, promoting unsafe sex, other risky behaviors); endangering the mental health of a child; schools unequipped to be mental health clinics; contributing to delinquency of a child; recommended reading for children?; the Massachusetts model; unconstitutional restriction of First Amendment rights.
"The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools: An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior in public schools." Topics include:
-Endangering the physical health of a child (STDs, HPV, promoting unsafe sex, other risky behaviors); endangering the mental health of a child; schools unequipped to be mental health clinics; contributing to delinquency of a child; recommended reading for children?; the Massachusetts model; unconstitutional restriction of First Amendment rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)