Fascist Homosexual Intimidation Tactics & Macy's Window

What is the difference between groups simply exercising their political free speech and fascist intimidation groups? You're seeing a good example of it this week in the controversy over the Macy's "gay pride" display window.

MassResistance engages in political debate. We address constitutional and governmental issues. We write about the profound negative impact that homosexual extremism and "homosexual marriage" are having and will have on societal stability, the rights of parents, and our freedoms of religion and speech. We also touch on the public health disaster of promoting homosexual behaviors. These are issues that should be open to public debate.

The groups on the other side do not engage in debate. They engage in a variety of vicious intimidation tactics. Aside from their emotions-based lobbying in the State House and media, they are all about SHUTTING DOWN any dissent from their revolutionary views. Incensed over the grassroots response to MassResistance's action alert on Macy's homosexual advocacy window display, they've gone bonkers once again.

Today (Sunday, June 11) QueerToday called for a demonstration in front of the Boston Macy's store. The goal of the demonstration (according to one of their sign suggestions) is to "SHUT DOWN MASSRESISTANCE." They state:

This Sunday bring your rainbows and anti-massresistance signs to rally, and then head to the block parties! When the mannequins are returned and a REAL apology is issued we will claim victory over MassResistance and bigotry. This protest is as much about confronting and shutting down the voice of MassResistance and [sic; as?] protesting Macy's irresponsible and silly decision.

There you have it in their own words. They want to shut us down, silence us. But the only way they can silence us would be through unlawful acts including break-ins, violence, mayhem, arson, physical attacks, or assassination. Is that what they're calling for?

One of our intrepid reporters just informed us that the turnout for this demonstration was piddling -- fewer than 10! (We suspect that the rest of the supposed 100,000+ gay pride celebrants were up late last night.) Photos coming soon. Though their turnout today was low, we still need to beware their message because they mean it. And they have many allies in the government and media to help them accomplish it.

Let's review some of the recent intimidation activities. They go way beyond name-calling and verbal personal attacks.

Some person or persons from the homosexual extremist crowd broke into our home last November. Looking for "vulnerabilities", said a security expert. Credit card numbers used for harassment purchases. Message left in the house: "LEAVE". Who knows what personal information taken. And they surely now know the layout of the house and surroundings intimately.

The group behind today's demonstration, QueerToday, orchestrated a riot outside last October's "Love Won Out" Conference (a Christian ex-gay ministry associated with Focus on the Family) at the Tremont Temple Baptist Church. They were barely held at bay by policemen, as a thousand or so demonstrators thundered "SHUT IT DOWN!" and threatened to break down the doors, shaking the building through their loudspeakers and terrorizing the participants inside. (They had no permit for their demonstration.)

QueerToday also organized a disruption of Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in 2003, where extremist homosexual couples held hands, kissed, and turned their backs to the altar during the elevation of the Host.

Boston Herald and Globe columnists (Margery Eagan, Eileen MacNamara) write personal attacks, full of untruths, on Brian Camenker, head of MassResistance.

WHDH-TV Channel 7 News ran a story last week which included an outright lie about MassResistance by the executive director of the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts. No retraction has been made.

Bay Windows (homosexual newspaper) runs frequent stories targeting us, including the gratuitous naming of one of our children's high school. Headlines such as "Tracking [MR staff name]." (Hmm, what does the word "tracking" imply?) Bay Windows also refers its readers to two hate blogs specifically attacking the MassResistance staff and organization.

The website of Boston Pride refers its readers to a hate blog which attacks us personally, and is run by a man who harassed us at the office through personal emails, threatening us, mentioning our children, describing one's appearance and where he went to college, etc.

The Mass. Attorney General refused to prosecute the perpetrator of these harassing emails. Instead, they advised him to open up a blog which has since published our home address, phone number, and a personal email address.The blogger has close ties to one of the plaintiffs (an attorney) in the Goodridge "gay marriage" lawsuit.

Worcester City Hall and Police apparently colluded with homosexual activists in trying to shut down Pastor Tom Crouse's "Mr. Hetero" contest this past February. (There's a lawsuit pending on that case.)

KnowThyNeighbor published the name and town of every signer of the VoteOnMarriage petition to amend the Mass. Constitution to define marriage.

ACLU of Massachusetts is always ready to jump in with a statement calling us a "fringe" group. On talk radio last week, its director said we "froth at the mouth." Ditto people like Mayor Menino.

The Homosexual "Marriages" of Mitt Romney:

A State of "Holy" Sodimony -- or Just Plain Old Sodomy?

By John Haskins

Have Governor Mitt Romney's homosexual "marriages" been duly enacted into law even though Massachusetts' marriage statute still precludes them -- according to Margaret Marshall's own ruling? Are they real, or illegal (and thereby void)?

If the homosexual "marriages" are duly enacted "law," then obviously someone could show us the Act. And they could show us the part of the state constitution that lets judges strike down or enact laws. The court explicitly said that it was not striking down or enacting a law, but merely telling the Legislature it has a duty to do so. But the Legislature has not changed or suspended the law.

Or is it that Governor Romney enacted a new law and struck the old one down -- though it is still on the books? Then please show us the new Act that Romney proposed, ratified, and enacted all by himself. And then show us the top-secret part of the Massachusetts constitution that says that a Governor can enact a law. Because all I can find is the parts that say things like:

“The power of suspending the laws, or the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature...” (Article XX)

And:

“... the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.” (Article XXX)

And:

“(T)he people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent.” (Article X)

So if the marriage law that the Goodridge decision said allows only men marrying women is still a law, why did Governor Romney order the state and local officials to pretend that it is not? It is a crime to solemnize or cause to be solemnized any marriages that are in violation of the statute. It is also a crime for any official to subvert the constitution. Governor Romney, as every judge in Massachusetts is well aware, is committing an impeachable act every time he allows the one man-one woman marriage statute to be violated.

The mass confusion about the illegality of Romney's homosexual "marriage" licenses is due not only to the Governor's lying about the state constitution that he swore to uphold, and due not only to the mainstream media lying about it. More important is the number of timid, gullible, conformist establishment "conservatives" posing as informed, objective defenders of constitutions, of the natural human family, and of the fundamental right of children to have a father and a mother. They are the ones propping up Mitt Romney's Big Lie, and subverting the Massachusetts Constitution.

John Haskins is Associate Director of the Parents' Rights Coalition.

(c) John Haskins

AIDS Action Committee &/or Ch. 7: Spreading Lies About MassResistance

Outright lies: Boston’s Ch. 7 WHDH-TV ran a story Wednesday (6-7-06) on the Macy’s “Gay Pride” window display, and MassResistance’s success in getting the “trans” mannequins removed.

(Watch the video of the news story.)

The Ch. 7 report included the expected name-calling by Mayor Menino. But worse was the libelous statement by Rebecca Haag, Executive Director of AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts! (Remember, AIDS Action Committee is publisher of the Little Black Book. Not exactly an exercise in truth-telling.)

Haag said: “These are the same people who go to soldiers’ funerals and protest because they believe that gays are in the military. These are not nice people.”

[Just before this, Haag said:] “They talked about the breasts looked enlarged. Those are ‘pecs’. Maybe they haven’t been to the gym. That’s what men do when they lift weights. So they’re trying to make things up. They’re trying to create controversy that doesn’t exist.”

Rebecca Haag at the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts:
294 Washington Street, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
rhaag@aac.org (617) 450-1262

Diego M. Sanchez,
Director of Public Relations & Social Marketing
dsanchez@aac.org (617) 450-1524

News Director of WHDH-TV Ch. 7:
Linda Miele
617-725-0777
7news@whdh.com

Macy's Male Mannequins and Margery Eagan's Smear Tactics

Normal

Abnormal

Margery Eagan's smear of our mainstream group in today's Boston Herald once again makes us wonder if there's some profound, unresolved personal "issue" driving her vitriol. It makes us think of stories we've heard from crisis pregnancy center counselors, who have told us that this sort of anger and lashing out may be a sign of post-abortive guilt feelings that have never been properly dealt with. Just think: A quarter or more or all American women have had at least one abortion. This probably includes a disproportionate number of "liberal" women -- ACLU types, bitchy columnists -- who defend their "right" to kill babies.

It seems Margery is also confused over male-female physiology, and can't quite bring herself to admit that Macy's "gay" male mannequins do NOT exhibit normal pectoral muscles. (And she also seems to be strangely focused on Victoria's Secret mannequin breasts. Have they "undermined [her] confidence" in her own body? Why bring up Victoria's Secret in a discussion of radical homosexual propaganda?)

Margery asks how MassResistance learned about the Macy's Pride display. The answer is, in her own newspaper in an article entitled "Pride and Joy" (June 1), pushing the glories of Pride Week on everyone.

MassResistance "Like Wet Paper"?

Mumbles Menino supporting diversity at an AIDS walk

The ever eloquent Boston Mayor Mumbles Menino slammed the mainstream supporters of MassResistance who dare to call his office to question the rainbow flag flying over Boston City Hall, or who demand that Macy's remove its window display of rainbow-skirt draped, breasted male mannequins.

Menino told Bay Windows that it was the "radical right wing" causing all the recent unpleasantness. “They call, but I treat them like they’re a piece of wet paper. They’ll disappear eventually. I don’t take them very seriously.”

MassResistance to Mumbles: No, we're NOT going to disappear! And it's hard to believe anyone has to take you seriously.

Mumbles can be reached at Boston City Hall: 617.635.4500

Email: Mayor@cityofboston.gov

"Daddy is a Tranny" at "Boston Pride"

NOTE (6-13-06): The photos originally appearing in this posting have been removed as a courtesy to the innocent children involved. See our posting on 6-13-06 for further explanation. If you want to view the photos once posted here, go to:

http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march2/

http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march3/

Look for the two adults and children in the orange T-shirts. But who knows how long these links will remain active?

[original 6-6-06 posting:]

What really goes on at Boston Pride? One event is the "Boston Dyke March." Here are some photos from their 2004 event, of a "family" sanctioned by Governor Mitt Romney and Empress Margaret Marshall.

[XXX Censored photo]
Take a good look at "Daddy". Mommy thinks there's lots to smile about with their "cute" T-shirt slogans. These photos are proudly posted on the Boston Dyke March website -- so we don't want to hear any complaints that WE are violating anyone's privacy!

[XXX Censored photo]

Shirt caption on woman on left reads: "Daddy is a Tranny"

[XXX Censored photo]

Shirt reads: "Kid of Queers." Are we having fun yet?

(Sticker on shirt reads: "This child supports MassEquality.")

Calling Reasonable People Bigots is Bigotry, Sen. Kennedy

Sen. Ted Kennedy is calling reasonable people -- who support the federal marriage amendement -- "bigots". This is bigotry on his part. (See his absurd editorial, "GOP Says 'I Do' to Bigotry" in the Boston Herald, 6-6-06.)

MassResistance doesn't even support the federal amendment. Among other problems, it doesn't ban civil unions. But Kennedy gets that wrong too! Nothing in the amendment stops states from establishing civil unions, domestic partnerships, whatever. Kennedy says:

Proponents use fear tactics and claim that marriage is under attack by activist judges. That’s simply not true. The country is divided over gay marriage; within the laws of each state, there is ongoing debate in which Congress should not intervene. A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry - pure and simple. A vote for it is a vote against civil unions, against domestic partnerships, and against efforts by states to treat gays and lesbians fairly under the law.

How is it a "fear tactic" or "bigotry" to discuss the effect of homosexual "marriage" on societal stability? This is the latest Democrat/liberal line: that conservatives are instilling "fear" and "being divisive" if they dare to question some bizarre idea that goes against millennia of tradition and common sense. And clearly the liberals aren't happy that America has awakened to the fact that they're getting their way only through the activist courts, so they're trying to deny that.

(Compare this to the welfare "debate". Was it a "fear tactic" to talk about the effect on children of fatherless homes? Was it "divisive" to question the wisdom of replacing responsible fathers with welfare checks? Well, yeah -- the liberals did manage to put a damper on this debate by labeling any questions "racist"! Even now there's an effort to squelch the understanding that the liberal "Great Society" led to the drug and crime problems in our inner cities.)

While we don't support the VoteOnMarriage amendement here in Massachusetts either, Kennedy should be ashamed of himself for falsely claiming that there is legitimate "ongoing debate". We all know that constitutional requirements and parliamentary rules are ignored by our state Legislature, at least concerning marriage amendments!

Gov. Romney Untrustworthy on Marriage Since 2004

A sure sign of a supposedly "pro-family" politician's unreliablity is his willingness to attend a same-sex "wedding."

A friend recently unearthed this item on Gov. Mitt Romney [as reported by WCVB Channel 5, just days before the phony "marriages" started in May 2004]:

Gov. Mitt Romney called on protesters to be respectful and hospitable to those getting married on Monday [May 17, 2004]. The state's most prominent opponent of gay marriages, Romney said he might attend same-sex wedding ceremonies in the future. But he declined the first invitation from radio personality Darrell Martini, known as the Cosmic Muffin. Romney said he had a scheduling conflict.

We've also heard that a former steadfast ally of the pro-family cause, State Senator Robert Hedlund (R - Weymouth), attended a "wedding" of two men, and told a constituent he's "under a lot of pressure" to vote against the marriage amendment. And State Rep. Garrett Bradley (D - Hingham) recently stated, "If two men or two women want to get married, that's okay with me." ("Battle Continues in Bay State Over Definition of Marriage," by Gail Besse, National Catholic Register, 5-21-06.)

Prominent Blacks Expose Phony "Civil Rights" Argument by Homosexual Activists

The Weekly Standard just published a piece by Boston's own Rev. Eugene F. Rivers, and Kenneth D. Johnson, black Americans who see through the phony claim by homosexual propagandists that same-sex "marriage" is a "civil right." Logical and historically correct as their piece is, it will probably have little impact on radical homosexuals who are all about emotions and selfish desires, and irrational concerning the greater good of society.

From Same-Sex Marriage: Hijacking the Civil Rights Legacy:

"... [T]here is nothing invidious or discriminatory about laws that decline to treat all sexual wants or proclivities as equal."

The movement to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions has packaged its demands in the rhetoric and images of the civil rights movement.... As an exercise in marketing and merchandising, this strategy is the most brilliant playing of the race card in recent memory. Not since the "poverty pimps" of 35 years ago, who leveraged the guilt and sense of fair play of the American public to hustle affirmative action set-asides, have we witnessed so brazen a misuse of African-American history for partisan purposes....

As the eminent historian Eugene D. Genovese observed more than 30 years ago, the black American experience as a function of slavery is unique and without analogue in the history of the United States. While other ethnic and social groups have experienced discrimination and hardship, none of their experiences compare with the physical and cultural brutality of slavery....

Whatever wrongs individuals have suffered because some Americans fail in the basic moral obligation to love the sinner, even while hating the sin, there has never been an effort to create a subordinate class subject to exploitation based on "sexual orientation."

It is precisely the indiscriminate promotion of various social groups' desires and preferences as "rights" that has drained the moral authority from the civil rights industry. Let us consider the question of rights. What makes a gay activist's aspiration to overturn thousands of years of universally recognized morality and practice a "right"? ...

Genital Mutilation: Some Bad, Some Good?

Photo credit: Bay Windows

(Photo from the 2005 "Boston Dyke March" -- part of Pride Week -- which went through the Back Bay, featuring the female "Tranny Bois" marching down the street. Look very carefully. These are women who have had their breasts surgically removed, and are parading as "bois" with their chests bared.)

Genital Mutilation: Some Bad, Some Good?

The Boston Globe ran a story today (from the International Herald Tribune) on a study that shows "Genital cutting raises risk of childbirth mortality." It's about time we started seeing more discussion of this hideous practice of "female circumcision." But because the practice is African and/or Muslim, it's usually not touched by the liberal media. So this is a refreshing change.

Why can't our own culture start dealing honestly with the scandal of "sex-change" genital and breast mutilations? Why is modern America afraid to discuss the abomination of "sex reassignment" surgeries and hormone treatments? What are the long-term health effects on people electing the treatments? Why is the "transgender/transsexual" fad getting a free pass?

Should Taxpayers Fund Con's Sex-Change -- or "Trans" Propaganda in Schools?

For the life of us, we can't figure out why everyone's going nuts over the convicted murderer who is demanding a sex-change operation ... while apparently few are upset that our teenagers are constantly hearing about the wonder of such surgeries in our public schools. In both cases, taxpayers are funding support for insane, unnatural mutilations. In the former case, it involves adults. In the latter, children are being drawn into that sick world, usually without the knowledge of their parents! Which case is worse?

The Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth directs students to an organization -- BAGLY -- which is run by a M2F transsexual who speaks to high school students all over the state about "trans" issues and resources. And Boston Mayor Menino opens up Boston City Hall to a gay/trans prom every May.

Certainly Gov. Romney isn't too upset about this unhealthy message being drummed into our public school students. He had a chance to disband the "Governor's Commission" and blew it. And now we have a group of 16 state senators setting up an independent state commission which will promote such lunacy even more forcefully in the future. The current Commission chairman, Kathleen Henry, has stated her goal that "bisexual and transgender youth" will receive as much "support" in the future as "gay and lesbian youth" are now getting from the Commission. It is, after all, a subgroup that seems to be growing.

From the Boston Herald report on the wife murderer who is demanding that the state pay for his sex-change surgery, "Con: Fund my sex change." (Note that Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey is upset by the murderer's demand. But she has nothing to say about the "trans" propaganda coming at our children in the public schools.)

Not satisfied with his taxpayer-funded female hormones and laser hair removal, a convicted killer-turned-transsexual is again asking the state to pony up to complete his transformation into a woman. Robert Kosilek, who is serving life in prison for strangling his wife, was back in federal court yesterday, again demanding that the state Department of Correction pay for his sex-change operation.

A similar bid was denied in 2002, and his latest attempt has infuriated Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey. “I strongly oppose using taxpayer dollars to fund a sex-change operation for any prisoner, but especially a convicted murderer,” Healey said. ...

Kosilek, who wears his hair long and tucked behind his ears, has developed larger breasts since beginning hormone treatments. He has testified that he suffered from gender identity disorder since he was 3 years old and had attempted suicide twice. He has also said he tried to castrate himself.

The con began his crusade for a taxpayer-funded sex change after his 1990 arrest for strangling his 36-year-old wife, Cheryl. Her body was dumped in a parking lot.

Pedophile Political Party in Netherlands: Is Massachusetts Next?

We read in Reuters that the Dutch pedophiles are strong enough to seriously talk of launching a political party. Their demands? Lowering the sexual age of consent to 12 -- then eventually abolishing it. Also: decriminalizing child pornography, sex with animals, drugs, public nudity, etc.

Meanwhile on the Massachusetts scene, we've reported on State Senator Jarrett Barrios' plans to establish an independent Massachusetts government commission "for" gay, lesbian, bisexual, and trans youth. Commission members would include only the most radical GLBT activists. So can Massachusetts be far behind the Netherlands? Let's see -- We already have pre-schoolers indoctrinated about "alternative families," and bills filed in the legislature to decriminalize sodomy and bestiality. And government-sponsored mixers where adult men hand out flyers to teens at a GLBT prom, inviting them to parties in private apartments.

From the Dutch news report:

Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its Web site it would be officially registered Wednesday, proclaiming: "We are going to shake The Hague awake!" The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

"A ban just makes children curious," Ad van den Berg, one of the party's founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper. "We want to make pedophilia the subject of discussion," he said. ...

"They make out as if they want more rights for children. But their position that children should be allowed sexual contact from age 12 is of course just in their own interest," [said an] anti-pedophile campaigner. Right-wing [does that mean "bad"?] lawmaker Geert Wilders said he had asked the government to investigate whether a party with such "sick ideas" could really be established....

The party wants private possession of child pornography to be allowed ... It also supports allowing pornography to be broadcast on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening. Toddlers should be given sex education and youths aged 16 and up should be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves. Sex with animals should be allowed although abuse of animals should remain illegal, the NVD said. The party also said everybody should be allowed to go naked in public and promotes legalizing all soft and hard drugs and free train travel for all.

When Breast Removal Is Not Enough

We've often wondered if F2M's (female-to-male transsexuals) feel frustrated, only half-way there. After all, M2F's are able to grow "breasts" AND have "neo-vaginas" constructed. (Check out the BAGLY.org website, which provides a link to more info.) Always seemed a bit sexist to us.

Check out this subtly transphobic news item from WebMD (referring to "disfigurement", "birth defects"? -- and why don't they mention this technique's application to transsexual humans?). Scientists are now mastering the technique of growing artificial penises: Scientists Grow Artificial Penis in Lab (May 23, 2006).

It's now possible to replace a defective, damaged, or diseased penis with a penis grown in a laboratory -- in rabbits.

But the finding promises an amazing new treatment for infants, boys, and men who suffer penis disfigurement. The replacement organ would be grown on a penis-shaped matrix seeded with cells from the patient's own body.

"Our goal is eventually to treat infants and adults with birth defects, penis trauma, or penis cancer," Atala tells WebMD. "But this is a future goal. We are now deciding which animal model to explore next." ...

Atala says the new penises have blood vessels and nerves that allow them to become fully functional. Indeed, the replacement penises worked like a charm. The rabbits were able to get erections, mate with females, and get females pregnant with normal, healthy pups.

This latter issue -- whether trans people are able to get satisfaction -- was on the minds of the teenagers attending this year's GLSEN Boston conference. One student asked if a trans person would still have sexual pleasure if they changed their genitals. We're not sure how it was answered, since such penises have not yet been attached to humans.

Early Years of Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth

[First in a series exposing what the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth is really all about.]

An oldie but goodie. Check out this letter by Scott Whiteman (famous for exposing the GLSEN seminar in 2000 instructing our children how to "fist" ). The letter is from February 2000, just prior to the infamous GLSEN conference. The very premise of the commission, specifically "gay" teen suicides, was false.

... the 1989 suicide statistics have been proven false (Boston Herald, "Gay teen suicide state refuted", May 25, 1997, 5). ... The Youth Risk Behavior Survey is "self-reported" and "there is no way to establish its accuracy" ... We have based our public policy on the potentially false or misleading statements of 14 gay kids. ...

The Governor's Commission gives a mixed message. "Officially" and in the papers, LaFontaine [ notorious "gay" activist and first Chairman, a "man accused of hate crimes for his organization of an event at which condoms were thrown at Catholic priests"] says that its not about sex, and he "believe[s] very strongly that all students should not be sexually active in high school" (Boston Herald, "Conservative study rips state sex ed program," December 29, 1999, p 24). But after school, at gay clubs throughout the Commonwealth, freely distributed information giving gay-youth "[a] chance to really get to know yourself and other queer youth on a much deeper level" is given to our high school students. Which are we supposed to believe? Ought we believe the "official" statements given by middle-aged men who have sex with men, with a vested interest in homosexuality and without children in Massachusetts schools? Or should we believe the literature discovered by parents with children in Massachusetts schools?

What is the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth really all about? Is it about "identity", "safety", "civil rights"? Or is it about pushing children into unnatural and dangerous behaviors?

Has the Governor's Commission toned it down any in recent years? No, they've just learned to disguise who they really are.

BAGLY's Public Disservice Announcements

Listen to BAGLY's (Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth) "public service announcements" on their website:

http://www.bagly.org/community/

Don't know what radio stations they may be playing on.

Witness Outside the BAGLY Queer/Trans Prom

BAGLY Prom at Boston City Hall, May 13, 2006
(part of MassYouthPride 2006, sponsored by Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth)

Witness account:
I was there on Boston City Hall Plaza outside the BAGLY Queer/Trans prom. (The BAGLY organization – Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth -- uses the word “queer”.) It was a depressing, sad scene. The entrance was decorated with two rainbow-colored balloon archways. Hundreds of excited young people were milling about, waiting for the event to start at 7 p.m. They kept flooding out of the Govt Center T station.

Some were dressed in the wildest outfits imaginable (including lots of cross-dressing), and some were in relatively normal clothes but often with some little rainbow accent. One young girl was in a skimpy spaghetti strap evening dress and heels, standing in the cold, pouring rain with no coat, soaked through, waiting to get in. One tall, skinny man in his mid-20’s or older (certainly older than the supposed 22-year-old cutoff age) was in a ghastly outfit with a mini-skirt, black fishnet stockings, and high black boots, with Goth makeup -- frightening to look at. Same-sex couples were holding hands, and some were kissing.

I couldn’t get the tale of the Pied Piper out of my head. The use the fun rainbow colors, balloons, and promises of indescribable pleasure to entice these unfortunate young people into this snake-pit of depravity. Instead of a hypnotic flute, the modern abductors use queer hip hop groups like “DeepDickollective” to lure the kids. Then the door slams shut on them, and few will escape. (We never did find out what happened to the children once the Pied Piper got them into his cave.)

There was no apparent police presence outside Boston City Hall. (I could not go inside – too old to get in.) There were older people circulating outside. A friend who was younger (who could fit into the crowd) took some photos, and encountered an older man who said he was part of the security, checking party-goers’ ages, but was handing out little flyers recruiting boys to a weekly gay men’s volleyball game. Worse, he handed out a flyer showing two adult men holding a boy between them, with the caption:

Join Our Play & Dinner Groups
Every week
Private apts
No fee
18-40 only
Email us for next party
[gives email and phone#]

At one point, a goon came marching over towards me with an angry expression, as I peered through the glass wall at the entrance to City Hall. (What are they hiding?) After this “warning” I left.

State-Sponsored Pedophilia?

Flyer handed out by a middle-aged man posing as “security monitor” at the BAGLY prom at Boston City Hall, part of the MassYouthPride events -- sponsored by the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. (Does this help explain all those young men in their 20’s with HIV/AIDS ?)

Is this state-sponsored pedophilia?

For complete report:
http://www.massresistance.com

Media Bury News: 2nd Marriage Amendment To Be Killed by Mass. Legislature & GLBT Lobby

Doesn't this seem like pretty big news? The head "gay" lobbyist in Massachusetts announces on Friday their plan -- including cooperation from the Senate President and Speaker of the House -- to scuttle a citizens' referendum to define marriage.

Surely the Boston Globe and Herald know. We even emailed our posting (which first revealed this sleazy plot) to the Globe reporter supposedly covering the marriage amendment story.

But no, there was total silence in the Saturday and Sunday papers. What the Herald and Globe both found newsworthy over the weekend was a manufactured story from AP, "Gays see shift in momentum toward acceptance in Alabama" (with the Globe running a picture of an attractive, chubby lesbian couple and "their" son). Managed news -- just like living behind the Iron Curtain.

The mainstream GLBT media are trying to figure out how to spin this story. After all, this will be the second time in four years a citizens' referendum has been unconstitutionally killed by the most corrupt state legislature in America.

WE PREDICTED THIS! VoteOnMarriage Amendment to Be Killed

News Flash!

WE PREDICTED THIS! Bay Windows writes that VoteOnMarriage.org's amdendment will be killed through a procedural maneuver, using OUR definition of marriage bill H653 (which was filed to create a statute, not an amendment, defining marriage) -- which was ILLEGALLY turned into an amendment by homosexual activist Senator Barrios.

Our May 18 posting prompted the outpouring of strategy from the homosexual lobby.

So what kind of award do we get for political acumen? Meanwhile, VoteOnMarriage kept this possibility as quiet as they could, though we believe they knew full well of this threat. How must all their supporters feel? We did warn them! Last summer, a group of true conservative, pro-family organizations and leaders came out against the amendment, under Article 8 Alliance/MassResistance's leadership. Besides disagreeing the strategy and particular content of the amendment, we predicted court challenges and just such legislative maneuvering as we're now seeing!

Some of our recent postings on the marriage amendment scam:

Marriage Amendment Coverage in Globe Tells Only Half the Story (May 18)

Mass. Legislature's Scheme to Scuttle VoteOnMarriage Amendment (May 14)

MassResistance Trip to ConCon Cancelled! (May 9)

Mass. Family Institute and VoteOnMarriage Advocate "New Rights" (Jan. 11)

"Gay" Activists Will Use "Any Means Necessary" (Jan. 9)

You Can't Placate the Monster (Sept. 14, 2005)

Attorney General Reilly Approves Unclean Marriage Amendment (Sept. 7, 2005)

Gov. Mitt Romney Is "Father of Gay Marriage"

Parents' Rights Coalition associate director makes serious charges in American Family Association Radio interview:

- A catastrophic surrender is underway as pro-family organizations and conservative media avoid exposing Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

- Gov. Romney's blatant fraud will turn out to be one of the most destructive things that has ever happened to constitutional law and the social fabric of the United States. Ted Kennedy could only dream of what Mitt Romney is pulling off with the help of many prominent conservatives.

On May 18, American Family Association Radio interviewed John Haskins, Associate Director of the Parents’ Rights Coalition of Massachusetts. AFA Radio has over 150 stations and affiliates around the country. The following is a partial transcript of the interview:

[Haskins:]

(On how Governor Romney gets away with funding homosexual brainwashing of schoolchildren while posing outside his state as a pro-family conservative:)

Like the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald, the news media around the country refuse to investigate or report honestly on the homosexual and transsexual groups that are using tax money to go after vulnerable children and lonely teenagers, under the pretense of suicide prevention. This is a growing national scandal underway now for at least fifteen years that will rival the Catholic clergy molestation scandal that so much media energy was put into.

(On why most Americans believe that Romney is defending traditional marriage:)

Likewise the media tirelessly pretends that homosexual marriage in Massachusetts is legal. As Governor Mitt Romney knows very well, it was his illegal executive order that imposed homosexual "marriage", not the Goodridge court decision. I personally know that he was advised in advance that he was violating the state constitution. We've presented to "so-called" conservative media outlets, such as the National Review, and to pro-family organizations the irrefutable evidence that Romney is the founding father of homosexual "marriage" and that he has committed an impeachable act by violating several articles of the state constitution.

The real tragedy is that many pro-family groups and the conservative media continue to cover up for Romney and ignore the plain meaning of the Massachusetts Constitution, which says that neither the governor nor any court can strike down laws. Homosexual "marriage" is still illegal in Massachusetts, yet some conservatives pretend it is legal.

So what we're seeing is a catastrophic surrender by pro-family organizations and conservative media that we are trusting to defend our values, our religious freedom, our parental rights and constitutional law. We're seeing conservative lawyers mislead people -- defending flagrant violations of a state constitution as somehow legal and binding. These are lawyers who, if you ask them, have to admit they've never even read the Massachusetts Constitution.

The cause of this is a desperate need among socially and professionally ambitious conservatives to be accepted by the establishment. But they are covering up a huge political lie that is destroying the culture and the constitutional law that our children were supposed to inherit from us. By covering up Gov. Romney's betrayal of the constitution and the family values he proclaims while touring through conservative primary states, conservatives are engaging in a colossal surrender of all that we owe our children.

Mitt Romney's Big Lie is one of the worst things that has ever happened to constitutional law and traditional values in the United States. I assure, you, Ted Kennedy could only dream of what Mitt Romney is pulling off before our very eyes and with the help of many prominent conservatives.

Marriage Amendment Coverage in Globe Tells Only Half the Story

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?

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."

"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.

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

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.

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....