Take a look at this outrageous propaganda masterpiece, published jointly by the Mass. Department of Education and the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth:
Outright. Your right to be.
This colorful pamphlet entices our children into the GLBT world and encourages them to become activists. (If you try to find it on the Dept. of Education website, it was recently taken down. But our link still works -- for now.) Check out all the smiling kids, rainbow flags, bright colors, and slick design.
This taxpayer-funded pamphlet, distributed to children all over the state, teaches our young teens that "homophobia" is a fact. That the "struggle" of gay, lesbian, and bisexual teens is a "civil rights" issue. That expert legal help exists for them, that they should demand whatever they can think of at school, and they'll get it through legal intimidation. That anyone who disagrees that homosexuality and bisexuality should be considered healthy, legitimate, and morally acceptable behaviors is a HATER and must be scolded and re-educated. That they should all become junior "hate crimes" Gestapo agents and monitor their school environments.
This vile production first appeared under Governor Paul Cellucci. The notorious David LaFontaine (condom thrower with ACT-UP at the Cathedral in Boston) was then Chairman of the Commission, with activist attorney Vincent McCarthy as Vice Chairman, and BAGLY employee Andy Garcia as program and event coordinator.
Here is a model the pamphlet provides for a "Safe Schools Pledge" that all members of a school community should be asked to sign:
"I pledge from this day onward to do my best to interrupt prejudice and to stop those who, because of hate, would harass or violate the civil rights of anyone. I will try at all times to be aware of my own biases against people who are different from myself. . . I will speak out against anyone who mocks, seeks to intimidate, or hurt someone of a different race, religion, ethnic group, or sexual orientation. I will reach out to support those who are targets of harassment. I firmly believe that one person can make a difference and that no person can be an 'innocent bystander' when it comes to opposing hate. I recognize that respect for individual dignity, achieving equality and opposing racism, prejudice, ethnic stereotypes, discrimination, homophobia, anti-Semitism, gender bias, sexism, ageism, scapegoating, and all other forms of hatred is a responsibility of all people."
Students are told how to organize gay clubs at their schools, how to overcome opposition, where to turn for legal help. They are led to the Fenway Community Health Center (distributor of Little Black Book to teens at the GLSEN conference in 2005); a task force on "hate crimes"; GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, who prosecuted the exposers of the GLSEN Fistgate seminar, brought the gay marriage case in Massachusetts, are now pushing for "transgender rights", and many other extremist cases).
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
The "Born Gay Hoax"
Check out this lecture (a one-hour video) on the "Born Gay Hoax." We ran across it on the Intercollegiate Studies Institute's excellent website.
From the ISI forum on this lecture:
Ryan Sorba, an ISI Campus Representative at Cal State-San Bernardino gave a lecture last week at his school.... I know Ryan well and he is almost an "expert" on the subject of his lecture and I hope he writes and speaks more on the subject of homosexuality.
Through a psychological approach, Ryan not only views homosexuality as against the natural law, but he also points out the "homosexualist" political movement that has arisen in the past few decades and the many fallacies in their argument that some people are "born gay." Ryan's lecture insists that all people are "born straight" and that there is a "born gay" hoax that has been furthered without any scientific evidence. The idea of being "born gay" is relatively new to the homosexualist movement, yet this idea has had terrible consequences.You can watch the full hour-long lecture (and believe me you will learn alot!) via this link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4207851797866730699
From the ISI forum on this lecture:
Ryan Sorba, an ISI Campus Representative at Cal State-San Bernardino gave a lecture last week at his school.... I know Ryan well and he is almost an "expert" on the subject of his lecture and I hope he writes and speaks more on the subject of homosexuality.
Through a psychological approach, Ryan not only views homosexuality as against the natural law, but he also points out the "homosexualist" political movement that has arisen in the past few decades and the many fallacies in their argument that some people are "born gay." Ryan's lecture insists that all people are "born straight" and that there is a "born gay" hoax that has been furthered without any scientific evidence. The idea of being "born gay" is relatively new to the homosexualist movement, yet this idea has had terrible consequences.You can watch the full hour-long lecture (and believe me you will learn alot!) via this link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4207851797866730699
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Homosexuals and Spiritual Understanding
Photo credit: InNewsWeekly from Boston Pride 2006Today's Boston Globe rushed to announce a planned press conference by the "Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry," who insist that thousands of years of Judeo-Christian teachings have gotten it wrong, and that "marriage" can be based on sodomy. (See "Multifaith coalition targets O'Malley; Members support same-sex marriage.") The coalition, which shares an office with MassEquality, accuses Cardinal O'Malley of "religious discrimination" and says "it violates the principle of church-state separation to deny civil marriage rights based on Catholic teaching."
In other words, the Cardinal has no place speaking on anything concerning government and laws, whether it's abortion, the death penalty, war, poverty programs, whatever. But the "progressives", as they call themselves, can impose their religious understanding on the rest of us, and it's not religious discrimination. Yes, the "progressives" understand spiritual truths about sodomy "marriage" the rest of us just don't get.
Why, just look at the loving couple above at the recent Pride celebration in Boston. One fellow is so devout he's tatooed a cross on his arm, and the other is wearing a cross necklace! Now they get it! (Note also the poster for the Ramrod "gay" bar.) They look like they have "marriage" on their minds.
What would Jesus do?
What would Jesus do?
Monday, June 26, 2006
MassEquality Stickers Put to Good Use?
Yesterday's posting made us really sad. Sad for the young woman, sad that we had to be so brutal in getting the TRUTH out.
So we thought we'd lighten things up a bit. Check out this photo (which we hesitate to post on a conservative blog): At least this young woman in the "Dyke March" has a sense of humor, and an understanding that God did not want her to go to unnatural surgical extremes. It's the best use of MassEquality's silly "Support Equality" stickers we've seen yet!
So we thought we'd lighten things up a bit. Check out this photo (which we hesitate to post on a conservative blog): At least this young woman in the "Dyke March" has a sense of humor, and an understanding that God did not want her to go to unnatural surgical extremes. It's the best use of MassEquality's silly "Support Equality" stickers we've seen yet!
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Why?
At the "Dyke March" -- Boston Pride 2006 What has this young woman done to herself? And -- WHY? Did BAGLY give presentations on "transgenderism" in her high school or college?
This is what the Boston Pride Committee, as well as the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, now support. Instead of affirming this sort of behavior, our schools and state agencies (if involved at all) should be getting these people the psychological counseling they need.
It's not stopping at "straightforward" homosexuality, folks. The horse is out of the barn. Once the public accepts one form of perversion, anything goes. (The sticker on her shorts appears to read "Trans Dyke" ... yet another category.)
How sad. Do you want this to happen to your daughter or granddaughter?
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Witches, Warlocks, Pagans at Boston Pride
(c) 2006 MassResistanceWitches, warlocks, goddess worshippers. This is the diversity we are told we must celebrate! The Independent Pagans of New England marched in Boston's Pride parade a few weeks ago. The Pride Committee had no problem allowing Satan worshippers to strut their stuff.
The goddess figure on the poster is captioned: "All acts of love and pleasure are Her rituals." Under the coiled rainbow snake on the left it says: "Don't tread on me."
Webster's dictionary gives several definitions for "pagan": (1) a follower of a polytheistic religion (as in ancient Rome). (2) one who has little or no religion and who delights in sensual pleasures and material goods.
"Met with cheers of "Look, it's the Pagans, " "Blessed Be, " and "Yahhh, the Pagans, " shouted from the spectators lining the winding route of the 2005 GLBT Pride March/Parade, those of us that chose to march were received warmly by the vast majority of those that lined the streets of Boston on June 11th, 2005....
"At approximately 11:45, we invoked the elements with a call on a bull's horn, and called upon the Goddesses Athena and Aphrodite, and the God Hermes, to aid and protect those gathered there to march throughout the day....
"In the past years, we were able to march with some of the other religious groups, as a statement of our presence as another religious community, just not as organized as the others. In the last few years, these groups have become more scattered throughout the march, and finding a place this year was more than the usual challenge. We were welcomed by another facet of the Gay community, the Radical Fairies, to march behind them...."
Gender Confusion in the Episcopal Church
The newly elected Presiding Bishop for the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, reveals that church now suffers from a serious case of gender confusion. From her (his?) homily last week:"That bloody cross brings new life into this world. Colossians calls Jesus the firstborn of all creation, the firstborn from the dead. That sweaty, bloody, tear-stained labor of the cross bears new life. Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation -- and you and I are His children. If we're going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we're going to have to give up fear."
Her thoughts on whether homosexuality is a sin: "I don't believe so. I believe that God creates us with different gifts. Some people come into this world with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender, and some people come into this world with affections directed at people of the other gender."
Friday, June 23, 2006
Fenway Community Health Supports Scenes from Hell
Bay Windows (the homosexual newspaper in Boston handed out at Stop & Shop supermarkets and public libraries around the state) runs a series called "One of Us". This week it's about a "guerilla theater" group that hangs out in "gay cruising grounds."
The director of the group says it collaborates with Fenway Community Health (publisher of the Little Black Book) and is supported by Starbucks. (The director says he is also the "Men’s Health Coordinator at MAP for Health, a community-based organization working with Asians and Pacific Islanders on HIV Education and Outreach.")
"One of Us"? That implies this scene is typical of the "gay" lifestyle, and pertinent to readers of Bay Windows. The interview reads like a scene from hell. Here are excerpts:
…I direct guerilla theater in gay cruising grounds.
What form does that take? It’s a project named “Street Theater Named Desire.” We do short, short plays and safe-sex outreach.
Does that call a halt to the cruising? We want to make sure that the cruising continues, so what we do is intentionally hot: our actors generally only perform in their underwear, and we supply all the accoutrements a “fenster” [men cruising "The Fens" area in Boston] would need for a night in the park: condoms, lube, coffee, donut holes, water, bug spray, hand sanitizer, baby wipes, blankets to sit on and poster-size porn.
What do you think of the argument that the best way to stop endangering gays in the Fens would be to hack it down? I think it’s a denial of the power and the magic of horniness. I think hacking down the reeds will only move men into the garden plots, and I think it’s a denial of over 100 years of history....
And what does a Theater Offensive week look like? It includes rehearsing with A Street Car Named Desire; a chunk of designing and crafting; designing T-shirts and porn cards; starting the work on a community-based program called Repeat Offenders, working with our collaborator — Fenway Community Health, and other sponsors like Starbucks; weekly safer-sex outreach at Buzz; and more.
The director of the group says it collaborates with Fenway Community Health (publisher of the Little Black Book) and is supported by Starbucks. (The director says he is also the "Men’s Health Coordinator at MAP for Health, a community-based organization working with Asians and Pacific Islanders on HIV Education and Outreach.")
"One of Us"? That implies this scene is typical of the "gay" lifestyle, and pertinent to readers of Bay Windows. The interview reads like a scene from hell. Here are excerpts:
…I direct guerilla theater in gay cruising grounds.
What form does that take? It’s a project named “Street Theater Named Desire.” We do short, short plays and safe-sex outreach.
Does that call a halt to the cruising? We want to make sure that the cruising continues, so what we do is intentionally hot: our actors generally only perform in their underwear, and we supply all the accoutrements a “fenster” [men cruising "The Fens" area in Boston] would need for a night in the park: condoms, lube, coffee, donut holes, water, bug spray, hand sanitizer, baby wipes, blankets to sit on and poster-size porn.
What do you think of the argument that the best way to stop endangering gays in the Fens would be to hack it down? I think it’s a denial of the power and the magic of horniness. I think hacking down the reeds will only move men into the garden plots, and I think it’s a denial of over 100 years of history....
And what does a Theater Offensive week look like? It includes rehearsing with A Street Car Named Desire; a chunk of designing and crafting; designing T-shirts and porn cards; starting the work on a community-based program called Repeat Offenders, working with our collaborator — Fenway Community Health, and other sponsors like Starbucks; weekly safer-sex outreach at Buzz; and more.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Senator Jarrett Barrios' Budget Follies
State Senator Jarrett Barrios, who claims to be "married" to Doug Hattaway (bigtime Democrat consultant and former AlGore spokesman), has adopted several young boys. We don't know what adoption agency he worked with.
We do know that he has inserted into the proposed FY2007 state budget a grant for $375,000 to the Center for Family Connections, which probably does some great work -- but which also is running a summer seminar in Provincetown this July for adoptive families. Hmm... This might prove more interesting than his recent encounter with marshmallow fluff. (See EHS 940 in Senate Budget amendments.) The Center's website wasn't up, but we found this info on the Mass. Adoption Resource Exchange site:
We do know that he has inserted into the proposed FY2007 state budget a grant for $375,000 to the Center for Family Connections, which probably does some great work -- but which also is running a summer seminar in Provincetown this July for adoptive families. Hmm... This might prove more interesting than his recent encounter with marshmallow fluff. (See EHS 940 in Senate Budget amendments.) The Center's website wasn't up, but we found this info on the Mass. Adoption Resource Exchange site:
Center for Family Connections : 21st ARCHeology Summer Intensives on Adoption and Complex Blended Families Searching For Self: How the search-and the story-heal. Sunday, July 9th – Wednesday, July 12, 2006. Provincetown Theater, Provincetown, Cape Cod MA. For more information on fees and registration, please call Caitlin Fitz Gerald at 617-547-0909 or 1-800-KINNECT or visit their Web site. Each presenter will tell one story that will illuminate, teach, humor, honor and heal. All will look at the personal search that is a part of building your ‘self ’ as a parent (birth, adoptive, foster, step); as an adopted person (legal adoption or emotional adoption); and/or as a professional who comes in contact with mythic that search that people take in finding themselves and their families.
The founder and director of the Center for Family Connections, Dr.Joyce Maguire Pavao, has reviewed a book on "Gay Men Choosing Parenthood", which she says:
"gives the reader an opportunity to explore the fact that no one has the right to be a parent , but anyone who has the desire and the ability to provide a safe and stable family for a child in need, should be able to provide that healing and that family. People may have problems with policy around gay parenthood, but once a family is formed, we must work to provide the holding environments to keep that family—and most especially those children—safe and sound. Fathers are often underrated and underserved in general, and the world at large and professionals whowork with families need to have an understanding of the challenges and how to provide support , especially for gay fathers."
Monday, June 19, 2006
KnowThyNeighbor.org Exporting Intimidation Tactics to Other States
photos (c) 2006 MassResistance/TD
KnowThyNeighbor.org (KTN), the website that posted the names of all the signers of the Massachusetts marriage referendum petition, claims it just wants to encourage friendly discussions between neighbors. And the head of the "Freedom to Marry Coalition" in Massachusetts said the site can provoke "friendly, non-confrontational discussion." What lies!
Look at their banners at the recent Pride parade in Boston. "Vote Bigotry Out!" Clearly, in their minds, anyone who signed the petition is guilty of "bigotry," and therefore would be unable to take part in a real dialogue. And KTN's threat to any would-be signer is blatant: "When you sign, it's online."
Now, KTN is going national. Their website links to its new operation in Florida, and encourages GLBT activists around the country to start intimidation sites in their own states. The Boston Globe reported that KTN officially consulted with the Florida group which has now posted the 450,000 marriage petition signers in that state. A "church" hosts the Florida operation, ChristChurchOfPeace.org.
"KnowThyNeighbor.org is a grassroots, non-profit organization promoting dialogue on marriage equality in Massachusetts and advocating for the removal of governmental barriers to public information by providing meaningful access online. ... If you see a friend, family member, or neighbor on the list of petition signers, make sure they are not a victim of fraud and let them know why marriage equality is important to you." -- Yeah, right...
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Two "Daddies" Will Teach Daughter "Fierce Pride"
We were expecting to see this: rants on "Fathers' Day" -- with the apostrophe moved one letter to the right. Sure enough, WorldNetDay links to a wacky piece out of Seattle. And our very own Boston Globe Magazine's monthly homosexual "Coupling" columnist writes about how tough things still are in Massachusetts for families like his: two homosexual "married" men who have adopted a baby girl.
The Globe columnist uses that old, dishonest analogy that same-sex parents are no different from mixed-race parents. But race -- an inborn and normal identifying factor -- cannot be equated with chosen abnormal, homosexual behaviors. Even to equate the homosexual couples' adoptive circumstances to a single mother adopting a baby from Africa is dishonest. The African child, if left in Africa, would have been consigned to a neglected life in a poor orphanage, so surely a single parent in the U.S. is preferable -- and not unnatural. But there were HUNDREDS of normal, heterosexual married couples anxiously waiting to adopt a child like the little girl placed with these two homosexual men in Arlington.
Speaking as an adoptive parent of a child of a different race, I am particularly offended by the mixed-race family comparison. Yes, this Arlington "family" will be stared at as different, as ours still is! But the difference is (again) that the stares our family sees are related to unsettled popular attitudes about RACE (and even adoption), whereas the stares in their direction are connected to people's gut sense that this girl is in trouble. How will she grow up, what will she be exposed to? Clearly she'll be taught that homosexuality (in all its "diversity") is normal. The "daddies" admit they plan to take her to Provincetown events. Later, if not already, we'd expect they'll involve her in Boston Pride parades and gay clubs at her school. They say they will raise her with a "fierce pride."
No matter what attempts are made to make life "normal" for adopted children, the pain of their early loss (never knowing their biological parents) is always there for them. That is enough of a challenge. Why add the element of unnatural homosexual "parenting" to the package? Not long ago, social workers would have had the sense to protect this child from that extra stress. But now, thanks to the dominance of radical leftists and homosexual activists in our social service professions, normal parents are overlooked in favor of a placement furthering GLBT social re-engineering. How sad for this child -- and many others like her.
(From Coupling: "Happy Fathers' Day," by David Valdes Greenwood, 6-18-06:)
Even as we try to raise Lily with love and a sense of safety, she's always going to see that her family isn't the established norm. Is it any wonder, then, that we get dreamy-eyed over ads for Rosie O'Donnell's R Family cruises, designed for gay-parented families? Or that we plan to make an annual tradition out of Family Week in Provincetown in hopes that, for at least a few days a year, Lily will see her family as the yardstick, not the exception to the rule?
But we don't plan to live the rest of our lives on a cruise ship or in a beach town. We plan to raise Lily at home in her own community, where, if she looks closely enough, she'll see as many configurations of families as there are constellations in the sky. Two moms packing their girls off to school. Two dads and their son welcoming a new baby. A mom and a dad redoing their backyard so their toddler has a place to play. A mixed-race couple singing lullabies in two languages. A single mom raising the daughter she went to Africa to adopt.
We want Lily to see all of this and to keep it in her heart for those times when the world stubbornly insists there is only one family picture. We cannot shield her from people who would erase us, whether from storybooks or society, but we can teach her to celebrate Fathers' Day, and every day, with unfettered joy and fierce pride.
The Globe columnist uses that old, dishonest analogy that same-sex parents are no different from mixed-race parents. But race -- an inborn and normal identifying factor -- cannot be equated with chosen abnormal, homosexual behaviors. Even to equate the homosexual couples' adoptive circumstances to a single mother adopting a baby from Africa is dishonest. The African child, if left in Africa, would have been consigned to a neglected life in a poor orphanage, so surely a single parent in the U.S. is preferable -- and not unnatural. But there were HUNDREDS of normal, heterosexual married couples anxiously waiting to adopt a child like the little girl placed with these two homosexual men in Arlington.
Speaking as an adoptive parent of a child of a different race, I am particularly offended by the mixed-race family comparison. Yes, this Arlington "family" will be stared at as different, as ours still is! But the difference is (again) that the stares our family sees are related to unsettled popular attitudes about RACE (and even adoption), whereas the stares in their direction are connected to people's gut sense that this girl is in trouble. How will she grow up, what will she be exposed to? Clearly she'll be taught that homosexuality (in all its "diversity") is normal. The "daddies" admit they plan to take her to Provincetown events. Later, if not already, we'd expect they'll involve her in Boston Pride parades and gay clubs at her school. They say they will raise her with a "fierce pride."
No matter what attempts are made to make life "normal" for adopted children, the pain of their early loss (never knowing their biological parents) is always there for them. That is enough of a challenge. Why add the element of unnatural homosexual "parenting" to the package? Not long ago, social workers would have had the sense to protect this child from that extra stress. But now, thanks to the dominance of radical leftists and homosexual activists in our social service professions, normal parents are overlooked in favor of a placement furthering GLBT social re-engineering. How sad for this child -- and many others like her.
(From Coupling: "Happy Fathers' Day," by David Valdes Greenwood, 6-18-06:)
Even as we try to raise Lily with love and a sense of safety, she's always going to see that her family isn't the established norm. Is it any wonder, then, that we get dreamy-eyed over ads for Rosie O'Donnell's R Family cruises, designed for gay-parented families? Or that we plan to make an annual tradition out of Family Week in Provincetown in hopes that, for at least a few days a year, Lily will see her family as the yardstick, not the exception to the rule?
But we don't plan to live the rest of our lives on a cruise ship or in a beach town. We plan to raise Lily at home in her own community, where, if she looks closely enough, she'll see as many configurations of families as there are constellations in the sky. Two moms packing their girls off to school. Two dads and their son welcoming a new baby. A mom and a dad redoing their backyard so their toddler has a place to play. A mixed-race couple singing lullabies in two languages. A single mom raising the daughter she went to Africa to adopt.
We want Lily to see all of this and to keep it in her heart for those times when the world stubbornly insists there is only one family picture. We cannot shield her from people who would erase us, whether from storybooks or society, but we can teach her to celebrate Fathers' Day, and every day, with unfettered joy and fierce pride.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
What About the Children at Boston Pride -- and With Homosexual Parents?
There were many young children at the Boston Pride parade and festival on the Common last Saturday. One very young group paraded with a banner advertising a chain of pre-schools. Others apparently attended with the adults they live with -- such as "Tranny Daddy" and "Queer Queer Queer Mom." Most are learning from their activist parents to support the ACLU's attack on America, Western values, and Judeo-Christian morals.
These adult guardians believe it a good thing to expose their children to this event, where homosexual sex paraphernalia are handed out, and participants identify themselves only through their strange sexual behaviors. Where a drag queen makes grossly filthy jokes, including not-so-subtle implications about the new rage for gay couples adopting Filipino babies (" ... you know why? Because they're beige, and they go with everything."). Where witches and "radical faeries" parade as "independent pagans." Where people march almost naked, fat lesbian bikers ride down the street topless, and transsexuals are cheered as they strut their DSM-IV stuff. Where the Boston polyamory group and the New England Leather Alliance (a 501(c)-3 organization!!) give out their web addresses. Where young women wear tight T-shirts showing that they've had their breasts removed.
Macy's and other corporate sponsors, the Human Rights Campaign, Mayor Menino, and the Boston Pride committee itself all portrayed this as a "family-friendly" event. GLSEN had a bus in the parade. (Bay Windows claims the "only major snafu came when festival emcee Hedda Lettuce, whose raunchy stand-up act clashed with the tone of the largely family-friendly event, tore into the Pride Committee from the stage after organizers asked her to tone down her act, inviting them to 'eat [her] pickled ass.' ")
Obviously, the definition of "parent" and "family" are now up for grabs, along with "marriage". For those homosexual parents who have children not as an accessory or part of their interior decorating scheme, we still wonder how they can have the best interests of their children in mind if they drag them to such an event. As Dale O'Leary wrote ["The truth about the human person," The Pilot, 5-5-06]: "Of course, same-sex couples who acquire children love them, but such natural emotions will only make it harder for them to admit that they put their own desires above their children's needs." And we doubt she ever contemplated the "families" coming to this sort of event!
O'Leary points out that studies purporting to show children do as well with homosexual parents as heterosexual parents "don't meet the minimum standards for valid research. Most use very small samples, often drawn from the friends of the person doing the study. Some don't even compare children raised by same-sex couples with those raised by their biological married parents, but instead use children raised by single mothers as a control group. The researchers don't ask the hard questions and don't follow the children over time. In several studies, the authors did not accurately represent their own data." And we are certain the researchers don't discuss the effect of parents bringing their children to events such as Boston Pride.
At a recent GLSEN Boston seminar, a homosexual activist teacher told a story about a very sad, quiet boy in his middle school class who kept apart from all the other kids. The teacher gloated that the student seemed so happy when he (the teacher) "came out" to his students, and the boy approached him to confess he had two mommies and was glad to have someone to talk to (...undoubtedly yearning for a father, the adult male who should have been there). But the GLSEN activist doesn't see this from the other perspective: that bringing up a child in this unnatural home was essentially an act of abuse, or at least selfishness, on the part of the two mommies. Their very unhappy, lonely boy was the result.
These adult guardians believe it a good thing to expose their children to this event, where homosexual sex paraphernalia are handed out, and participants identify themselves only through their strange sexual behaviors. Where a drag queen makes grossly filthy jokes, including not-so-subtle implications about the new rage for gay couples adopting Filipino babies (" ... you know why? Because they're beige, and they go with everything."). Where witches and "radical faeries" parade as "independent pagans." Where people march almost naked, fat lesbian bikers ride down the street topless, and transsexuals are cheered as they strut their DSM-IV stuff. Where the Boston polyamory group and the New England Leather Alliance (a 501(c)-3 organization!!) give out their web addresses. Where young women wear tight T-shirts showing that they've had their breasts removed.
Macy's and other corporate sponsors, the Human Rights Campaign, Mayor Menino, and the Boston Pride committee itself all portrayed this as a "family-friendly" event. GLSEN had a bus in the parade. (Bay Windows claims the "only major snafu came when festival emcee Hedda Lettuce, whose raunchy stand-up act clashed with the tone of the largely family-friendly event, tore into the Pride Committee from the stage after organizers asked her to tone down her act, inviting them to 'eat [her] pickled ass.' ")
Obviously, the definition of "parent" and "family" are now up for grabs, along with "marriage". For those homosexual parents who have children not as an accessory or part of their interior decorating scheme, we still wonder how they can have the best interests of their children in mind if they drag them to such an event. As Dale O'Leary wrote ["The truth about the human person," The Pilot, 5-5-06]: "Of course, same-sex couples who acquire children love them, but such natural emotions will only make it harder for them to admit that they put their own desires above their children's needs." And we doubt she ever contemplated the "families" coming to this sort of event!
O'Leary points out that studies purporting to show children do as well with homosexual parents as heterosexual parents "don't meet the minimum standards for valid research. Most use very small samples, often drawn from the friends of the person doing the study. Some don't even compare children raised by same-sex couples with those raised by their biological married parents, but instead use children raised by single mothers as a control group. The researchers don't ask the hard questions and don't follow the children over time. In several studies, the authors did not accurately represent their own data." And we are certain the researchers don't discuss the effect of parents bringing their children to events such as Boston Pride.
At a recent GLSEN Boston seminar, a homosexual activist teacher told a story about a very sad, quiet boy in his middle school class who kept apart from all the other kids. The teacher gloated that the student seemed so happy when he (the teacher) "came out" to his students, and the boy approached him to confess he had two mommies and was glad to have someone to talk to (...undoubtedly yearning for a father, the adult male who should have been there). But the GLSEN activist doesn't see this from the other perspective: that bringing up a child in this unnatural home was essentially an act of abuse, or at least selfishness, on the part of the two mommies. Their very unhappy, lonely boy was the result.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Catholics for Romney? Only If They Don't Understand the Constitution!
Last Sunday's Boston Globe ran an article on Gov. Mitt Romney's savvy way around federal presidential campaign fundraising regulations, namely his "Commonwealth PAC." "Romney has PAC affiliates in Iowa, Michigan, South Carolina, New Hampshire, and, formerly, in Arizona. Particularly beneficial to Romney are the affiliates in Iowa and Michigan, where there are no limits on how much an individual can give."
This aroused the curiosity of a few concerned Massachusetts Catholics, and they came across the Catholics for Romney blog. Read the FUN comments on the Monday, May 22 posting, "A site to bookmark." Massachusetts Catholics explain how Gov. Romney was responsible for the homosexual "marriages" through his order to Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks to issue "marriage" certificates -- which Romney had redesigned (without authority) to read "Party A" and "Party B". But the loyal Romneyites on that blog can't handle the truth!
And some mean things are said about MassResistance!!! ...
"There's an anti-Romney group (MassRessistance---and they are essentially "spamming" every site and discussion board possible with this same sorry story) that has made it their crusade to bash Romney on every possible occasion because he did not do an illegal 'George Wallace' style barring of the courthouse to prevent Gay Marriages from occurring."
Excerpts:
"WIN" wrote:
I am a Catholic and I have a problem with Mitt Romney seeking Catholic votes when he has been responsible for gay marriage. Contrary to a popular misconception created (except for lawyers and judges who are very much aware of this) which was created by Mitt Romney, gay marriage currently is not legal in Massachusetts. The SJC interpreted the marriage statute to NOT PERMIT same sex marriage. The SJC declared the marriage statute “unconstitutional” BUT they did not strike that law. It remains a statute on the books as it was originally written and intended. The Massachusetts Constitution clearly states that a law that remains on the books is the law until it is repealed by the Legislature. The SJC simply changed the “common law” meaning of the term marriage but because that term already exists in the statute and in the Constitution, the SJC’s “common law” declaration of a new meaning did not and could not change the statute nor the words of the Constitution because common law is subordinate to statutory and constitutional law. The SJC acknowledged this in the Goodridge case saying that they could not legislate and therefore gave the legislature 180 days to act. The legislature neither repealed the “unconstitutional” marriage law nor changed the law by way of a change to the statute nor by allowing the Constitutional Amendment to go through in 2005. Therefore the “law,” the marriage statute, that forbids same-sex marriage, continues to forbid it. The only reason why same-sex marriage licenses are being handed out is because Mitt Romney ordered them to be but he did that without legal authority under any statute. This is confirmed by the fact that the Massachusetts Legislature currently has two opposing bills pending before it; one that promotes same-sex “marriage” (H977/S967) and the other that defines marriage as the union of one man to one woman (H654). If same-sex marriage” was currently legal, there would be no reason to have either of these opposing bills pending before the Massachusetts Legislature. Romney knows this. He was told before May 17, 2004 and he has been told repeatedly, by prominent and not so prominent lawyers and others. He has a sworn duty to uphold the Massachusetts Constitution and the marriage statute. Every day that goes by is another day that he has violated massachusetts law.
Jeff responds:
I am not one for censorship . . . but the above post is so filled with misinformation that it will confuse people who do not understand the issue and should be removed . . . there's an anti-Romney group (MassRessistance---and they are essentially "spamming" every site and discussion board possible with this same sorry story) that has made it their crusade to bash Romney on every possible occasion because he did not do an illegal "George Wallace" style barring of the courthouse to prevent Gay Marriages from occurring.
carol said...
Jeff, Why do you refer to prolifers as "these people"? I know WIN (as do most of us here in the Boston area who have been fighting prolife and profamily issues at the State House). You're not coming out of the starting gate with a good strategy if you are going to attack us. I know this is disappointing, but most of us have alerted the RNC that the prolife movement will not stand behind Mitt Romney and we have told them the reasons why. WIN have given you the reasons why. We are dissatisfied with public statements and letters when we all know that he has the power to take the actions that protect the authentic U.S. Constitution. While his paper statements look good in a publicity campaign, we find them disingenuous and most, if not all of the Catholic prolifers I know here in MA long ago dismissed him as a prochoicer with the spin. It's not going to fly. Too many times we put the papers under his nose, pulled MGL and US Constitution and showed him we knew he had the authority - and asked him to take the actions. He refused. He flipped flopped and he has left prolife Catholic families to be chewed and mauled by the dogs. You will excuse us, I'm sure, as we take his statements and throw them in the trash. Lots of luck to the RNC if they select Mitt. They can kiss Catholic prolifers goodbye.
WIN wrote:
If there is a flaw in my legal analysis, please let me know what it is. Did the SJC reformulate not just the definition of marriage but also the definition of separation of powers? Is Mitt Romney, not one of the three "co-EQUAL" branches of Government? Does he not have the legal duty to uphold current Massachusetts law? What then is the current state of Massachusetts law? Please let me know? Either the SJC rewrote the marriage statute, which is clearly unconstitutional, or they did not. If they did not, Romney had no legal duty to order the issuance of marriage licenses. If they did, Romney had a legal obligation to ignore their unconstitutional legislative act (because the Massachusetts Constitution states that only the legislature may create laws). That by the way also applies to Mitt Romney. He as the executive branch has no legal authority to enforce laws that DO NOT EXIST. If there is a law in Massachusetts that permits same-sex marriage, please point it out. Read the Goodridge case and show me where the SJC did anything of the sort (ordering town clerks or even the legislature to do anything). They did not, but they are easy people for someone like Mitt Romney who needs a punching bag as he runs for president, to punch and claim that it is activist judges who changed the law. Why did Romney order Town Clerks to go against their religious beliefs and conscience and comply with Goodridge? What authority did he have to do that? There is no legal authority right now, in Massachusetts for same-sex "marriage." The licenses are illegal (VOID) and Romney is violating the Constitution. If he is not, please show me the legal authority or censor youself for not adding anything of value to this discussion.
This aroused the curiosity of a few concerned Massachusetts Catholics, and they came across the Catholics for Romney blog. Read the FUN comments on the Monday, May 22 posting, "A site to bookmark." Massachusetts Catholics explain how Gov. Romney was responsible for the homosexual "marriages" through his order to Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks to issue "marriage" certificates -- which Romney had redesigned (without authority) to read "Party A" and "Party B". But the loyal Romneyites on that blog can't handle the truth!
And some mean things are said about MassResistance!!! ...
"There's an anti-Romney group (MassRessistance---and they are essentially "spamming" every site and discussion board possible with this same sorry story) that has made it their crusade to bash Romney on every possible occasion because he did not do an illegal 'George Wallace' style barring of the courthouse to prevent Gay Marriages from occurring."
Excerpts:
"WIN" wrote:
I am a Catholic and I have a problem with Mitt Romney seeking Catholic votes when he has been responsible for gay marriage. Contrary to a popular misconception created (except for lawyers and judges who are very much aware of this) which was created by Mitt Romney, gay marriage currently is not legal in Massachusetts. The SJC interpreted the marriage statute to NOT PERMIT same sex marriage. The SJC declared the marriage statute “unconstitutional” BUT they did not strike that law. It remains a statute on the books as it was originally written and intended. The Massachusetts Constitution clearly states that a law that remains on the books is the law until it is repealed by the Legislature. The SJC simply changed the “common law” meaning of the term marriage but because that term already exists in the statute and in the Constitution, the SJC’s “common law” declaration of a new meaning did not and could not change the statute nor the words of the Constitution because common law is subordinate to statutory and constitutional law. The SJC acknowledged this in the Goodridge case saying that they could not legislate and therefore gave the legislature 180 days to act. The legislature neither repealed the “unconstitutional” marriage law nor changed the law by way of a change to the statute nor by allowing the Constitutional Amendment to go through in 2005. Therefore the “law,” the marriage statute, that forbids same-sex marriage, continues to forbid it. The only reason why same-sex marriage licenses are being handed out is because Mitt Romney ordered them to be but he did that without legal authority under any statute. This is confirmed by the fact that the Massachusetts Legislature currently has two opposing bills pending before it; one that promotes same-sex “marriage” (H977/S967) and the other that defines marriage as the union of one man to one woman (H654). If same-sex marriage” was currently legal, there would be no reason to have either of these opposing bills pending before the Massachusetts Legislature. Romney knows this. He was told before May 17, 2004 and he has been told repeatedly, by prominent and not so prominent lawyers and others. He has a sworn duty to uphold the Massachusetts Constitution and the marriage statute. Every day that goes by is another day that he has violated massachusetts law.
Jeff responds:
I am not one for censorship . . . but the above post is so filled with misinformation that it will confuse people who do not understand the issue and should be removed . . . there's an anti-Romney group (MassRessistance---and they are essentially "spamming" every site and discussion board possible with this same sorry story) that has made it their crusade to bash Romney on every possible occasion because he did not do an illegal "George Wallace" style barring of the courthouse to prevent Gay Marriages from occurring.
carol said...
Jeff, Why do you refer to prolifers as "these people"? I know WIN (as do most of us here in the Boston area who have been fighting prolife and profamily issues at the State House). You're not coming out of the starting gate with a good strategy if you are going to attack us. I know this is disappointing, but most of us have alerted the RNC that the prolife movement will not stand behind Mitt Romney and we have told them the reasons why. WIN have given you the reasons why. We are dissatisfied with public statements and letters when we all know that he has the power to take the actions that protect the authentic U.S. Constitution. While his paper statements look good in a publicity campaign, we find them disingenuous and most, if not all of the Catholic prolifers I know here in MA long ago dismissed him as a prochoicer with the spin. It's not going to fly. Too many times we put the papers under his nose, pulled MGL and US Constitution and showed him we knew he had the authority - and asked him to take the actions. He refused. He flipped flopped and he has left prolife Catholic families to be chewed and mauled by the dogs. You will excuse us, I'm sure, as we take his statements and throw them in the trash. Lots of luck to the RNC if they select Mitt. They can kiss Catholic prolifers goodbye.
WIN wrote:
If there is a flaw in my legal analysis, please let me know what it is. Did the SJC reformulate not just the definition of marriage but also the definition of separation of powers? Is Mitt Romney, not one of the three "co-EQUAL" branches of Government? Does he not have the legal duty to uphold current Massachusetts law? What then is the current state of Massachusetts law? Please let me know? Either the SJC rewrote the marriage statute, which is clearly unconstitutional, or they did not. If they did not, Romney had no legal duty to order the issuance of marriage licenses. If they did, Romney had a legal obligation to ignore their unconstitutional legislative act (because the Massachusetts Constitution states that only the legislature may create laws). That by the way also applies to Mitt Romney. He as the executive branch has no legal authority to enforce laws that DO NOT EXIST. If there is a law in Massachusetts that permits same-sex marriage, please point it out. Read the Goodridge case and show me where the SJC did anything of the sort (ordering town clerks or even the legislature to do anything). They did not, but they are easy people for someone like Mitt Romney who needs a punching bag as he runs for president, to punch and claim that it is activist judges who changed the law. Why did Romney order Town Clerks to go against their religious beliefs and conscience and comply with Goodridge? What authority did he have to do that? There is no legal authority right now, in Massachusetts for same-sex "marriage." The licenses are illegal (VOID) and Romney is violating the Constitution. If he is not, please show me the legal authority or censor youself for not adding anything of value to this discussion.
Thursday, June 15, 2006
ACLU Booster Meg Soens at Boston Pride Parade
(c) 2006 MassResistance/TDLexington GLBT activist Meg Soens at the Boston Pride parade on
June 10, 2006. Her shirt caption says:
70 Years Queer
ACLU
ACLU.org/LGBT
It's no wonder Meg Soens is in tight with the ACLU. She has organized Lexingtonians against the Parker family over the last year. She also led a session at the 2000 GLSEN Boston conference (in the year of "Fistgate") on how to incorporate lesbian materials into the elementary curriculum. And the Parker case is a favorite target of the ACLU.
Carol Rose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, also lives in Lexington. Her office published a press release in April, condemning "the filing of the lawsuit [by the Parkers and another family] against Lexington school officials as a baseless, discriminatory effort by a few parents to frighten teachers, interfere with public education, and censor discussions and programs to suit individual religious doctrine."
ACLU of Massachusetts staff attorney "Sarah Wunsch decried Macy’s for 'succumbing to the bigotry' of a fringe anti-gay group" in removing the Macy's mannequins. (Boston Herald, 6-7-06) Also on that topic, Wunsch said on WRKO radio that MassResistance supporters "foam at the mouth."
The ACLU is at the forefront of the radical homosexual movement. "The Lesbian & Gay Rights Project fights discrimination and moves public opinion on LGBT rights through the courts, legislatures and public education." They instruct young students on how to start "clubs" -- gay-straight alliances -- in their schools. The Massachusetts ACLU recently removed staff names and contact information from its website.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Macy's Supports "The Return of Tranny Daddy" at Boston Pride
The Return of Tranny Daddy
(c) 2006 MassResistance
This is what Macy's is supporting. As we promised in our last posting, we'll be sharing some photos MassResistance took at last Saturday's Boston Pride parade. We'll start our series with "The Return of Tranny Daddy" to Boston Pride. (See yesterday's posting for links to photos of this group in the 2004 parade. They are just so overflowing with pride, they paraded again.) Note their signs:
TRANS DAD
and
and
Queer Queer Queer Queer Queer
QUEER MOM
Does Drag Queen "Hedda Lettuce" Shop at Macy's?
He ought to, since Macy's supported his X-rated performance which was blasted all around the Boston Common, with his image on a gigantic screen towering over downtown. Lots of children (many adopted by GLBTs?) were listening.
Bay Windows reports on Hedda's excremental show, so foul that (normal) adult men we know had to leave.
[There were] "jokes about stretched anal orifices, gay couples adopting Filipino babies and pop singer Jewel giving oral sex with a chipped tooth. ... After Hedda had dropped more f-bombs than we could count, someone from backstage asked her to tone things down. And that's when Hedda blew her top and things got, well, entertaining. Click here to read Hedda's x-rated act. Read on to hear her temper tantrum...
"Pride Committee member Joblin Younger came on to close the show, and he admitted that he was the one who was the target of Hedda's wrath from on stage. 'In addition to thanking all the sponsors our artists, the performances today, were outstanding, including Hedda Lettuce, who ripped me a new one, [We'll bet he did! Did you enjoy it, Joblin?] Younger said. 'But she was fabulous, wasn't she? She was fabulous.' "
[Hedda writes on his blog:] "How ironic being censored at a gay pride event. Instead of cleaning up my act it enraged me and I went into a tirade on how the events organizers were trying to censor me for being too DIRTY and I asked the audience to shout out the dirtiest thing they could on the count of 3. The audience was more than happy to oblige me....
Bay Windows reports on Hedda's excremental show, so foul that (normal) adult men we know had to leave.
[There were] "jokes about stretched anal orifices, gay couples adopting Filipino babies and pop singer Jewel giving oral sex with a chipped tooth. ... After Hedda had dropped more f-bombs than we could count, someone from backstage asked her to tone things down. And that's when Hedda blew her top and things got, well, entertaining. Click here to read Hedda's x-rated act. Read on to hear her temper tantrum...
"Pride Committee member Joblin Younger came on to close the show, and he admitted that he was the one who was the target of Hedda's wrath from on stage. 'In addition to thanking all the sponsors our artists, the performances today, were outstanding, including Hedda Lettuce, who ripped me a new one, [We'll bet he did! Did you enjoy it, Joblin?] Younger said. 'But she was fabulous, wasn't she? She was fabulous.' "
[Hedda writes on his blog:] "How ironic being censored at a gay pride event. Instead of cleaning up my act it enraged me and I went into a tirade on how the events organizers were trying to censor me for being too DIRTY and I asked the audience to shout out the dirtiest thing they could on the count of 3. The audience was more than happy to oblige me....
"It just saddens me that we are still try [sic] appease these so called STRAIGHT FAMILIES that come to our events. We as gay people have been known to be on the cutting edge of comedy, style, art and more... so today I find us making steps backwards and trying to appease a bunch of people who have benefited throuhout [sic] the centuries from our creative energies. People who don't take chances and try to assimilate with the herd which is something we as gay people have fought so hard over the years not to become.
"So I will continue to be who I am despite what other fags and these STRAIGHT FAMILIES supposedly want from us. I am not your clown if you don't like what I have to say don't come to the events. And let us not start censoring each other or it will be the death knell for all of us."
Has Macy's seen Hedda's blog?
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
MassResistance Takes Down Revealing "Tranny Daddy" Photos
Courteous as always, MassResistance has agreed to remove some very revealing photos from this blog which originally appeared on the BostonDykeMarch website, taken by a "Drag King" performance artist who posts under the name "Truth Serum." We ran three photos of a group (two adults and three children) in orange T-shirts: the kids' shirts reading "Kid of Queers," one adult's shirt reading "Daddy is a Tranny." (Who knows if these photos will remain posted on their sites for long.)
Links to the photos:
http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march2/
http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march3/
Now we ask, if these photos are all about "Truth", why don't Dyke March and Truth Serum want the whole world to see them? Or is there one Truth for them, and a separate Truth for the rest of us? We have discovered over the past few years that nothing infuriates GLBT activists more than exposing their real world to the larger public. (For example, our photos of the riot at the Love Won Out conference, the Macy's mannequins, and now their own photos of Dyke March participants ...)
This is a movement used to operating under the radar, and the American public has given them the courtesy of "privacy" for so many years. Problem is, some of their weirder goings-on are now all too public. But if they don't want to appear on this blog, they shouldn't appear in public so bloggers on their own side will publish their photos!
"What they do in the privacy of their own bedrooms" may be their own business. But GLBT "liberation" and "marriage" have unfortunately made it ours now, too. Shove it in our face, and we have a right to post it! Isn't the Pride march all about making their "sexual expression" and practices public?
So get used to it, GLBT activists. While we may take down three of your photos out of courtesy to the three innocent children involved, we will soon be posting some great new photos WE have taken of some very public sidewalk scenes. (By the way, we credited the three photos to Boston Dyke March, and did not violate any copyright laws. But we have far better ways of spending our time than discussing copyright law with Truth Serum!)
Links to the photos:
http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march2/
http://www.truthserum.org/images/2004.06.11_dyke%20march3/
Now we ask, if these photos are all about "Truth", why don't Dyke March and Truth Serum want the whole world to see them? Or is there one Truth for them, and a separate Truth for the rest of us? We have discovered over the past few years that nothing infuriates GLBT activists more than exposing their real world to the larger public. (For example, our photos of the riot at the Love Won Out conference, the Macy's mannequins, and now their own photos of Dyke March participants ...)
This is a movement used to operating under the radar, and the American public has given them the courtesy of "privacy" for so many years. Problem is, some of their weirder goings-on are now all too public. But if they don't want to appear on this blog, they shouldn't appear in public so bloggers on their own side will publish their photos!
"What they do in the privacy of their own bedrooms" may be their own business. But GLBT "liberation" and "marriage" have unfortunately made it ours now, too. Shove it in our face, and we have a right to post it! Isn't the Pride march all about making their "sexual expression" and practices public?
So get used to it, GLBT activists. While we may take down three of your photos out of courtesy to the three innocent children involved, we will soon be posting some great new photos WE have taken of some very public sidewalk scenes. (By the way, we credited the three photos to Boston Dyke March, and did not violate any copyright laws. But we have far better ways of spending our time than discussing copyright law with Truth Serum!)
Monday, June 12, 2006
Letter to Mayor Menino
From our frequent contributor John Haskins:
One of the signs of our inability to hear God's voice and sense His anger at a culture that sacrifices its children, body and soul, to the idols of our time, is that the words and tone of Christ and the Prophets now seem extreme to our ears. I sent an e-mail to Boston Mayor Menino that I hope conveys the undiluted honesty and harsh rebuke that I believe Christ, Isaiah, and Jeremiah would address him with -- rather than the watered-down, instantly evaporating sermonettes delivered by most religious leaders today.
June 9, 2006
To Mayor Menino,
There you go again. You publicly call "trash" anyone who does not share your naive fondness for sodomy and its culture of death -- which treats children as political pawns who can't tell the difference between a lesbian and a father, or a homosexual man and a mother. Presumably you include Jesus Christ and every spiritual figure of the Old and New Testament -- and the Founding Fathers and most of Western Civilization -- in the group you are slandering.
You said: "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." You owe me and millions of others an apology for your foul and primitive remarks. Your "tolerance" and "open-mindedness" are bare-faced hypocrisy and we find it remarkable that you retain ridiculous, half-hearted pretensions to be a follower of Jesus Christ, whose moral code you mock and assault. Will Christ and His truth also disappear eventually?
You, sir, reveal yourself to be a consummate conformist: In the style of our day, you pass off your bigotry, contempt, and hatred as "tolerance." It takes no courage to do this, nor certainly any authentic love of fellow human beings, whatever their sexual habits. This is not courage but cowardice. Under the flag of Tolerance, haters pose as a new and superior breed of human beings, dedicated to erecting the new Apartheid against parents, voters, and now charitable organizations that cling foolishly to the moral core of Judeo-Christianity on which America was founded.
One thing is obvious: If you thought that it would pay more to turn your inverted, patchwork "morality" around 180 degrees, you obviously would. You repeatedly demonstrate that you have degenerated into a caricature of the sleazy, vain, corrupt political whore that our Founding Fathers warned us about.
May God have mercy on your immortal soul for your part in debauching present and future generations of Massachusetts children. And may God have mercy on the late, great City of Boston.
A Massachusetts citizen,
J. E. Haskins
One of the signs of our inability to hear God's voice and sense His anger at a culture that sacrifices its children, body and soul, to the idols of our time, is that the words and tone of Christ and the Prophets now seem extreme to our ears. I sent an e-mail to Boston Mayor Menino that I hope conveys the undiluted honesty and harsh rebuke that I believe Christ, Isaiah, and Jeremiah would address him with -- rather than the watered-down, instantly evaporating sermonettes delivered by most religious leaders today.
June 9, 2006
To Mayor Menino,
There you go again. You publicly call "trash" anyone who does not share your naive fondness for sodomy and its culture of death -- which treats children as political pawns who can't tell the difference between a lesbian and a father, or a homosexual man and a mother. Presumably you include Jesus Christ and every spiritual figure of the Old and New Testament -- and the Founding Fathers and most of Western Civilization -- in the group you are slandering.
You said: "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." You owe me and millions of others an apology for your foul and primitive remarks. Your "tolerance" and "open-mindedness" are bare-faced hypocrisy and we find it remarkable that you retain ridiculous, half-hearted pretensions to be a follower of Jesus Christ, whose moral code you mock and assault. Will Christ and His truth also disappear eventually?
You, sir, reveal yourself to be a consummate conformist: In the style of our day, you pass off your bigotry, contempt, and hatred as "tolerance." It takes no courage to do this, nor certainly any authentic love of fellow human beings, whatever their sexual habits. This is not courage but cowardice. Under the flag of Tolerance, haters pose as a new and superior breed of human beings, dedicated to erecting the new Apartheid against parents, voters, and now charitable organizations that cling foolishly to the moral core of Judeo-Christianity on which America was founded.
One thing is obvious: If you thought that it would pay more to turn your inverted, patchwork "morality" around 180 degrees, you obviously would. You repeatedly demonstrate that you have degenerated into a caricature of the sleazy, vain, corrupt political whore that our Founding Fathers warned us about.
May God have mercy on your immortal soul for your part in debauching present and future generations of Massachusetts children. And may God have mercy on the late, great City of Boston.
A Massachusetts citizen,
J. E. Haskins
Sunday, June 11, 2006
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.
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.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
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
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
Friday, June 09, 2006
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.”
(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
Thursday, June 08, 2006
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.
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.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
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
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
"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:
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.")
Monday, June 05, 2006
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)