Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Gay Newspeak Strikes Again!

Truly unbelievable ... but then they took control of the language some years back in the culture war. [See the piece by Scott Lively below.] Bay Windows, the Boston GLBT newspaper, reports:

Pro-Marriage candidates win!

What does this mean in gay newspeak? That the candidates supporting homosexual "marriage" won. Only 10% of the voters turned out for the election in former House Speaker Finneran's district. -- Advantage goes to the well-funded, well-organized homosexual activists. They have plenty of spare time, few family responsibilities, lots of money. [Wait--I thought they suffered from discrimination??] They're very adept at seeking out such opportunities: special elections, primaries, no one paying attention.

New Conservative Blog in Massachusetts

Can you believe it? We're not alone!!! Check out another CONSERVATIVE blog here in Massachusetts: (The only thing we take issue with is their claim to be the "premier" conservative blog in the state...) An excerpt:

The institution founded by the Puritan, John Harvard, is rife with impurities. Summers, who I have no great love for, is under attack for stating that there may be inherent differences between the sexes. It amazes me that the multi-culturalists at Harvard who insist that people are born gay can't accept that fact that the sexes may be born with inherent differences as well. And then, heaven forbid, an actress (we know how conservative THEY are), used heteronormative language (i.e. she only mentioned women as marrying men) in describing how women can have it all. The cultural terrorists went after her immediately to obtain an apology. Harvard is lost.

[Note from MassResistance: No, Harvard isn't entirely lost. MassResistance will be at the Harvard Faculty Club for brunch on March 20. See if you can find us there! We're working on assorted alum to come out of the closet and remind everyone of the meaning of VERITAS.]

Monday, March 14, 2005

"Married" Gays Whining over Their Taxes

Now they're whining that their "tax tangles" are too burdensome. It's just not fair that the federal government and IRS don't recognize their "marriage"! Something must be done to correct this violation of their civil rights! Not content to settle for their unfair advantage over singles, cohabiting non-married family members, etc., the unnaturally joined make the front page on the Boston Globe, crying over their federal taxes.

Not much sympathy on our part for the apparently well-to-do lesbian couple shown poring over their "blueprints for renovations to their house in Jamaica Plain." Tax professionals and accountants must be pleased. One said "she may charge up to twice her standard fee of $250 to $350, due to the extra work" filing for "married" gays. Apparently, high-income homosexual couples will have no problem paying. But they do enjoy complaining.

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Gay Orgies Untouchable by Law Enforcement

The radical gays are upset that Boston Police Commissioner O'Toole appointed a detective they don't like to the "hate-crimes" unit. (Boston Globe story, 3/12/05.) They don't like Sgt. Detective Joseph MacDonald because years ago he arrested one of their orgy planners.

Back in 1992, 161 nude gay men cavorted at what they called a "safe sex" party in Boston's South End. An admission fee was charged, alcohol was flowing, and "safe sex literature" was distributed. The D.A. later dropped the charges against the orgy planner ("selling alcohol without a license, maintaining a house of ill fame, and distributing obscenity").

But Gary Daffin, head of the Massachusetts Gay & Lesbian Political Caucus (very influential on Beacon Hill), is OUTRAGED!! that MacDonald would be appointed to this position. Daffin said the 1992 incident is "notorious" in the gay community. "It is surprising that they would appoint someone with this history.... his record seemed particularly egregious and he seemed particularly uncomfortable with gay people," Daffin said.

Seventeen Magazine Pushing the Gay Agenda

It's not only the public schools pushing acceptance of homosexuality on your kids. It's popular magazines like Seventeen. In the April 2005 issue, there is a prominent piece, "am i gay?" . (Note the cutesy, all-lower-case title.) The title is superimposed on two lovely feminine faces, staring at you with a confused, open-mouthed, intent expression.

Well, let's see who the sources are for this article: The past president of the Gay & Lesbian Medical Association in San Francisco. A psychologist who wrote Mom, Dad, I'm Gay. The director of policy for PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians & Gays).

If the young reader is confused or "questioning", she is directed to,, or 888-THE-GLNH ("for confidential counseling about your sexuality"). GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network) is the radical homosexual activist group recruiting our children in schools across America.

"Do you think you might be bisexual or lesbian?" Step 1: Answer four questions, and "if you [answer] yes to any of these, you probably are attracted to other girls to some degree." Example: "Do you ever think about what it would feel like to kiss or make out with another girl?" (Emphasis in original.) If you answered yes, you need to go to Step 2: Are you "ready to come out?" Contact the helping organizations above.

Click here to contact the editors of Seventeen.

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Sad Story in Lexington

A seminal strategy of the radical homosexual movement was their enlistment of children as pawns in their war against normality. Take this sad example from Lexington.

Just a few weeks ago, an unsuspecting father was shocked when his elementary-school child came home from school with a "diversity bag", including the book Who's In a Family?. (Well, you can imagine who's in that family...) When the father complained to the principal of the school (who said the school can do anything it wants), and a school committee candidate addressed the issue, it became a topic on the local politics chat board. A very telling post came from a lesbian mother (printed below).

Conservatives do have hearts. We feel for the letter-writer's family. We are struck by the woman's obvious normal desire to be a mother -- but also her self-delusion, her efforts to "normalize" the unnaturalness of her situation. And we are struck hard by the boy's situation. How sad to inflict this twisted reality on a child.

Needless to say, the boy and his classmates are forced by the unnaturalness of his family composition to dwell upon sexuality more than when regarding a normal family. Yes, it is sex education to consider a "marriage" that is obviously so different. How sad: for the mother, for her boy, for our society. Her letter:

Subject: Sex Education in the Lexington School Curriculum
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005

Dear Lexingtonians,

[A]s a lesbian mother here in town, I feel the need to address two basic assumptions that Mr. P seemed to be (and Mr J as well?) making: first, that talking about gay families is the same thing as talking about sex, and second, that it is okay to exclude our families from our school books and resources because some people don't like us being here.

First, the assumption that including books that have families like mine, headed by two mothers, in our elementary schools is somehow "sex education". Is it sex education to read a book about a man and a woman getting married? About a family where you have the birth of a younger sibling? If you think that a book that includes families with a man and a woman as parents ARE about sexuality issues or sex education, then our curriculum for kindergarten and first grade is, surprise, all about sex!! Of course, this may seem a bit silly. Why would it be different if it is a gay or lesbian headed family.

Please do take a look at the few books that include our families -- such as "Who's In a Family" that [Mr. P] mentioned. If you actually read them it is immediately obvious that these are not books about sex, or about 'sexuality issues' --- they are books as T wrote about families, all our families. On the second point: is it right to exclude our families from the resources and books in the classrooms? Or to give parents "advance notice" so they can pull their child out?

Let's be clear: everyone has a right to their own beliefs. Where we share a public space, however, as we do in our public schools, our behavior (teaching and other) must be inclusive and non-marginalizing. To quote the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: “neither the mantra of tradition, nor individual conviction, can justify the perpetuation of a hierarchy in which couples of the same sex and their families are deemed less worthy of social and legal recognition than couples of the opposite sex and their families" (from Justices Meaney's [sic; should be Greaney] concurrence in the Goodridge equal marriage case).

If our families are left out of the books that are read, if we are invisible in the curriculum because some people feel we shouldn't be here, then our schools indeed hurt our children and families by treating us as "less worthy", by, in the justices' terminology, 'perpetuating a hierarchy in which couples of the same sex are deemed less worthy... than couples of the opposite sex and their families.'

I will share a story: our older son came home very excitedly when he was in first grade. He was talking about a book at school that had mentioned someone who was "gay", and he was very happy. I didn't say much except the "oh that's nice" type of thing. Then he came home again with another such book. When it happened a third time, I finally felt I had to explain to him that "gay" in these books probably didn't mean people like those parents in his family, but "happy". He was deflated.

What was so clear, what stuck with me so strongly, was how hungry he was for stories at school that included our family. Finally, you may believe divorce is morally wrong, but would you say to the schools, I don't want you including books with any of those divorced families in them because it's mature subject matter and doesn't send the right message? I trust that most of you would answer no, for the same reasons that you should answer no as well to excluding the families of gay and lesbian people from books.

We are here, our children are here taking flute lessons and playing soccer, trying to be good people and good citizens and good neighbors, just like each of you. And we need to be included in the sense of who our large and diverse community is, reflected in our public institutions like the schools.

Thank you! -M.

Sunday, March 06, 2005

Romney's Getting It from Both Sides

Gov. Mitt Romney can't win. First, we remind everyone of his support of the homosexual agenda in our schools, and his failure to halt same-sex "marriage". Now Boston's GLBT newspaper, Bay Windows, is dredging up other fun stuff on the Gov. See "Mitt Romney's Secret Gay History!" (3/3/05) :

"During his 2002 gubernatorial run his campaign distributed bright pink flyers during Pride that declared 'Mitt and Kerry wish you a great Pride weekend! All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.' Romney also argued that he would not only support gay friendly policies but would fight on behalf of the gay community to secure benefits such as domestic partner benefits and hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples."

Back in 1994, when he ran for Senate against Ted Kennedy, Romney promised, "as we seek to establish full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent" [i.e., Kennedy].

Regarding the Boy Scouts, Romney said in the 1994 debate, "I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation." This reminded us that as head of the Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002, Romney barred the Boy Scouts from their traditional participation in the festivities. David Bresnahan reported in MassNews (6/18/02):

"[Romney] made it clear that the Boy Scouts would not be a part of the Olympics as they had traditionally been throughout modern Olympic history. There would be no Scouts in uniform for the public or press to see. Romney wanted no complaints from the homosexual community or the world press. In every past Olympics, regardless of host country, the local Scouts have participated in some way -- in uniform. In fact, some of the past Olympics even used Scouts in uniform to present the awards to the Olympians.

"Romney was very careful to eliminate the Boy Scouts from view. He appeased them by permitting Scouts to perform litter cleanup of Olympic sites before the Games began, and to help with putting up and taking down of security fences. All out of view of the public and the media. He also very cleverly made sure the homosexual activist community were invited to participate in the Olympics in a meaningful way that they would brag about.

"The homosexual website from the United Kingdom did that very thing on January 30, just before the games began. An article read by homosexuals all over the world proclaimed: 'Winter Olympics First To Welcome Gays'. 'The Winter Games in Salt Lake City, Utah, next month will be the first to open its arms to the gay community. Organisers [sic] of the 2002 Winter Olympics have actively gone out to get the gay community involved.' "

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Gender, Restroom, & Pronoun Confusion

Now, in Methuen, Massachusetts, we read about parents who are so "sensitized" to transgender acceptance that their little 9-year old girl is getting HER wish to "be" a boy. And the school authorities are going along with it. The Boston Globe reports (3/5/05):

"Dozens of parents flooded the Methuen school system with phone calls yesterday after a local newspaper reported that a fourth-grade girl had returned from the February school break requesting to be treated as a boy.... The child's parents told the Eagle Tribune on the condition of anonymity that their child, who was born with the body of a girl, has never identified as a girl. After consulting with medical professionals, they have decided to let him [sic] grow up as a boy and wanted teachers and other students to treat him as a boy.

"Dr. Norman Spack, clinical director of the endocrine division at Children's Hospital in Boston, said gender identity is formed at birth and is not a product of the environment. Much more research still needs to be done around how male and female brains differ and how transgenderism occurs, he said. Of the more than 100 transgendered people he has treated, many secretly cross-dressed as children and suppressed their gender identity because their parents were punitive.

'' 'In many cases they went on to live a life that was a sham, getting married and having children,' said Spack, one of the few pediatric endocrinologists in the country who specializes in gender identity and intersex issues. 'They go through a difficult time of depression coming to grips with the fact that their body doesn't match their brain.' "

Pseudoscience, anyone?!! Here again, as with AIDS, we seem to be witnessing the politicization of science.

There's no end to the strange demands of the "transgendered". In the last several years, restrooms have become a focus. The New York Times ran a story on March 4, "A Quest for a Restroom That's Neither Men's Room Nor Women's Room." Excerpts:

"[This is] a new political frontier: the campaign to establish gender-neutral bathrooms in public places. The idea is to make sure that transgender people (an umbrella term that can include transsexuals, cross-dressers and those with a fluid, androgynous identity who do not consider themselves completely male or female) can use bathrooms without fear of harassment.

"One reason the issue has significance on these campuses is that in contrast to previous generations, in which many sought to transform their birth sex through hormones or surgery, today's young transgender people are content with a more fluid identity.

" 'I use the male bathroom, because I live my life as a male,' said Rolan Gregg, a 29-year-old student at the California College of Arts and Crafts in San Francisco, who was born female and, though he [sic] is taking hormones, does not 'pass yet,' as he [sic] put it. 'The problem with not passing is that my risk of violence is really high. So going to the bathroom becomes really scary.' "

Clearly, the media are happy to play along with the pronoun confusion.

Thursday, March 03, 2005

Reader Beware: This is a Heteronormative Blog !!

The latest newspeak to come from the radical gay movement: "heteronormative" ! Their concepts are so absurd ... new words must be invented. Now we dare not speak about our own NORMAL heterosexual lives: marriage to a member of the opposite sex, naturally procreated children, etc. It might offend.

Just keep your mouth shut and let them run everything! Only they may speak and share their stories. Who would be interested in anything else these days???

First we see the report in the Boston Herald (3/3/05) on actress Jada Pinkett Smith's remarks at a Harvard event, which were highly offensive to Harvard's Bisexual/Gay/blahblahblah group:

"While neither group specified what Pinkett Smith said that was so offensive, a previous edition of the Crimson included a quote from the actress from the event at Sanders Theater.
'Women, you can have it all - a loving man, devoted husband, loving children, a fabulous career,' she said. 'They say you gotta choose. Nah, nah, nah. We are a new generation of women. We got to set a new standard of rules around here. You can do whatever it is you want. All you have to do is want it.' "

Also discussed by James Taranto in his Best of the Web Today (Wall Street Journal, 3/3/05):

"Calling the comments heteronormative, according to [BGLTSA Co-Chair] Woods means they implied that standard sexual relationships are only between males and females."

And in the Harvard Crimson (3/2/05):

"After some students were offended by Jada Pinkett Smith’s comments at Saturday’s Cultural Rhythms show, the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA) and the Harvard Foundation for Intercultural and Race Relations have begun working together to increase sensitivity toward issues of sexuality at Harvard.
"Students said that some of Pinkett Smith’s remarks concerning appropriate gender roles were specific to heterosexual relationships.
"In a press release circulated yesterday by the BGLTSA—and developed in coordination with the Foundation—the BGLTSA called for an apology from the Foundation and encouraged future discussion of the issue."

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

Sex-Change Operations: Against Nature

How sad--and sickening. In the March 1 "Dear Prudence" column, "Beyond Confused" asks how to address someone after a sex change operation. A friend had just had "surgery to become a woman", would be bandaged, and "the physical changes would be quite apparent".

Let's stop right there. If he was born a man, he is still a man. The surgery did nothing more than horribly maim, disfigure, and violate him. Such surgery is part of the culture of death. But the mainstream media is promoting total acceptance of this hideous practice.

But once the door has been opened to acceptance of homosexuality, how can we say no to bisexuality, transgenderism, and transsexuality? And this is what acceptance leads to: the mutilation of human bodies, against nature and creation.

Do we really want to teach our children that they might consider having their breasts or penises cut off, if they happen to be confused (or, as the homosexual movement says, "questioning")?

Gay Manifesto: NOT a Satire

Some follow-up on "An Essay on the Homosexual Revolution" or, the "Gay Manifesto". (See "Be Afraid. ... Be VERY Afraid", 2/19/05 below) . Apparently, the original essay included the following introductory line, which did not appear in the reprint in the Congressional Record:

"This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."

Would the inclusion of this introductory line in any way change the meaning, intent, or impact of the essay? As a friend wrote to MassResistance:

I'd seen the Gay Manifesto before, but seeing it again inspired me to see what the other side says in response. They admit it was written by a gay activist in 1987 and read into the Congressional Record in 1989. They dismiss it as a satire, but they quote the author's censored introduction: "the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor." So what's the major complaint? Isn't that the point; the oppressed dreamed of being the oppressor, and 20 years later aren't they well on their way? The analysis below is from

The Gay Agenda--How The Conservative Religious Right Created a Lie
(See Also:
The American Family Association and the 'Gay Nostradamus')
The "Gay Agenda" is but one of the many lies promulgated by radical religious political activists.
The Radical Religious Right has repeatedly referenced an article written by Michael Swift in 1987 at the request of the Gay Community News as satirical "proof" of the so-called "Gay Agenda". The article is titled "The Gay Manifesto".
One of the most notable examples of the religious right referencing this article is the video "Gay Rights, Special Rights", put out by Lou Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition. The video cites it with ominous music and pictures of children.
But when the religious right cites this text, they always omit the vital first line, which sets the context for the piece. In other words, every other version of this found on the net and in the literature of religious right political activists is part of the radical right's great lie about gay people.
"This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."
In fact, a "shocked, so very very shocked" congressperson read the article in the Congressional Record in 1989. Funny thing, though, the opening disclaimer was deliberately omitted.

So ... That line doesn't come across as a "disclaimer" to us. What we're dealing with is their angry dream come true.

Saturday, February 26, 2005

Romney to Mass. Teens: It's Great to be Gay!

Who does Governor Romney think he's fooling? He has NOT fought homosexual "marriage". In fact, he has encouraged the youth in our state to join with homosexual radicals in promoting their agenda and "lifestyle". See Romney's Proclamation urging the citizens of Massachusetts to celebrate our "gay" youth pride parade, only two days before homosexual "marriages" were to begin last May. And his Department of Education continues to fund the "gay-straight alliances" in our public high schools.

He blew it in this state, totally caved to the Court. He could have issued an executive order preventing the Department of Public Health from issuing "marriage" licenses to homosexual couples. Instead, he threatened our Justices of the Peace with losing their jobs if they refused to perform homosexual "marriages". He said he had to uphold the "law", though there is NO LAW authorizing homosexual "marriage" to uphold! (Or does he believe the Court makes law?)

The Boston Globe reports on Romney's recent campaigning for president in his other home state, Utah. He'd better know that the conservatives in Massachusetts have good memories. He's not going to get away with portraying himself as a general in the battle against homosexual "marriage". Utah and the rest of America will hear the truth.

Friday, February 25, 2005

Gay Lobbyist Guilty of Biphobia

Funny how one's prejudice just slips out from time to time. Even the most sensitive among us sometimes say things without thinking first.

While we thought we've been taught that being "bi" is a positive thing, maybe we got it wrong . . . Because now we read that radical homosexual lobbyist Arline Isaacson applied "bi" as a term of derision in knocking Governor Romney the other day:

"The governor's kind of 'bi' about this issue,'' said Arline Isaacson of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. "In one venue he swings for civil unions and in another venue he says he has always been against them.''

[ "Romney says he's always been opposed to gay marriage and civil unions", Associated Press, February 23, 2005.]

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

"FISTGATE" Revisited

It occurred to me that many readers might not know about the infamous "FISTGATE" conference of May 2000, and its fallout in Massachusetts and across the country.

GLSEN (the homosexual activist network which has taken over our public schools), with sponsorship by the Massachusetts Department of Education, conducted explicit training for high school students and teachers in perverted and dangerous anal penetration techniques. This is valuable background on the current struggle. It's one of those things the homosexual activists want to bury.

Read it with caution: X-rated and sickening.

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

The Imperial Judiciary in Massachusetts Strikes Again


It appeared to be an architecture review of the $150 million renovation of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court building in Boston. But the Boston Globe story gave vent to deep resentments by other judges in the state. ("Split Decision: Renovations done for SJC divide buildings, officials", 2-22-05.)

It seems that we, the riffraff-citizens denied our voice, are not alone in resenting the IMPERIAL JUDICIARY headed by Empress Margaret. Superior Court judges, attorneys, and their assistants have also been insulted by their newly restricted access to the Imperial Palace (full of eunuchs?).

"The Supreme Judicial Court, sharply criticized by some elected officials for the extravagance of its august new $150 million quarters, is now under fire from state trial court judges who say the high court has isolated itself from its less-elite brethren. Literally.

"In renovating the John Adams Courthouse in Pemberton Square, the SJC eliminated passageways that once provided a physical and symbolic link between the 1894 building and the soon-to-be-reopened Suffolk Superior Courthouse next door.

"In an unusual display of discord, some Superior Court judges and officials are denouncing the severing of the two buildings. And some see it as a deliberate effort by the SJC to cut itself off from more lowly courts and from the public.

" 'They don't want us to come into their building,' said one judge, who like other Superior Court judges interviewed insisted on anonymity for fear of reprisal. 'What are we, the riffraff?' "

To add insult to injury, the courthouse has been named after John Adams, who wrote the Constitution of our Commonwealth (long before becoming President). Of course, the Constitution is a living document, and surely Adams would not have intended that Article 8 ("how to remove tyrants") be applied to Empress Margaret.

The building looks great. What a nice backdrop for a demonstration. Let's see, the building dedication is set for Thursday, March 31. See you there?

Saturday, February 19, 2005


Many concerned citizens are pondering where this homosexual "rights" storm came from, seemingly so suddenly. Well, you might want to read the infamous 1972 Gay Rights Platform. See how long they've been at it, what they've accomplished, and what's next. AND DON'T CALL US ALARMISTS when we warn you that wacky perversions are coming to your streets and offices; that the perverts are coming after your children; and that polygamy is imminent. It's only a matter of a few years till they've accomplished all their goals ... unless you act now!

In particular, note these goals under their "State" demands:
"6. Repeal of all laws prohibiting transvestism and cross-dressing.
7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.
8. Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers."

Be Afraid. ... Be VERY Afraid.

"Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks!"

Ran across an interesting website, the International Organization of Heterosexual Rights, which catalogs the manifestoes, scary hot air, and weird goings-on from the homo "culture". Here are excerpts they've reprinted from one classic and frightening manifesto (written in 1987):

[This manifesto is in the Library of Congress. This essay was printed in the February 15, 1987 issue of the homosexual newspaper Gay Community News by Michael Swift, and was reprinted in the February 15-21 1987 Congressional Record. Excerpts:]

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together.

Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us. Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep.

Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too and only man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand with depth and feeling the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men….

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens….

Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in a communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.
All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and aesthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated….

We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution. Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks!

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Judge: Child Rapist Did GOOD WORKS

This takes the cake: During yesterday's sentencing of defrocked priest and convicted child rapist Paul Shanley, Judge Stephen Neel considered the good works Shanley had done on the streets of Boston! According to the Boston Globe (2-16-05),

"In determining a sentence, Neel said, he considered 18 letters from Shanley supporters, who praised the former priest for his work helping the homeless and addicted, the medical care he brought to young people on the street, and his support of gays and lesbians struggling with their identity."

We can imagine what form Shanley's support took, can't we? Because of his skill in counseling these confused young people, he got only 12-15 years (with probation possible sooner)! "Support of young people struggling with their identity" -- this is the same ruse used to get the gay/lesbian clubs in our high schools, which are no more than recruiting stations for the "lifestyle".

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

The "Gay" Deathstyle -- Redux

Is it any wonder that little or no progress has been made in getting "those at risk to avoid risky sex"? (New York Times 2-15-05) Isn't it obvious that homosexual males are still engaging in promiscuous, anonymous, and risky sex partly because we have all been instructed to approve of all things homosexual? No longer is any shame attached to such behavior. And here in Massachusetts, our court, legislature, and governor have gone so far as to bless anal intercourse with the sanction of "marriage"!!

The story in the New York Times misses this point. With the scare over a new virulent AIDS strain in that city, they are puzzling over why "gay" men are still behaving carelessly. And why counseling by health workers has had essentially no impact on lowering risky sexual behavior. Buried in the story is the idea that counseling doesn't work because "many high-risk men who engage in unprotected sex with multiple partners have histories of drug use, childhood abuse and depression." Could it be that these men weren't born "gay", but became that way due to deep childhood hurts, whether outright abuse, or neglect?

"Researchers say that several factors outside their control have made such public health efforts harder than ever. The antiretroviral drugs that have extended the lives of so many people with AIDS have also tempered the dread of catching the virus, they say, especially among a younger generation of gay men who have not known the agony of watching friends die of the disease.

"Many men now search for and find casual sex partners on the Internet, bypassing bars and other central meeting places where public health workers traditionally have reached people. And especially among gay men, the drug crystal methamphetamine has become associated with casual sex for some men. Some experts suspect that methamphetamine may also increase a person's susceptibility to infection by suppressing immune function."

A second NY Times story, "Gays Debate Radical Steps to Curb Unsafe Sex", reminds us of the failure of our public health establishment to deal with AIDS, and to be honest about the behavior that spreads it. (The "radical steps" alluded to, widespread screening and partner notification, hardly seem "radical" and should have been employed 20 years ago.) This failure has led us to the brink: "Many AIDS experts say it is only a matter of time before a supervirus does emerge", totally resistant to drugs. That supervirus may be what's just shown up in New York City.

Monday, February 07, 2005

NEW Health Risks in the Homosexual Community

So when are we going to deal with the serious public health crisis resulting from homosexual behavior? Not only are homosexual men dying of AIDS, "bisexual" men are spreading new diseases to females. And the cost in suffering to those in the lifestyle is also largely kept quiet. But we hear little about this in the mainstream press.

One reason the radical homosexual agenda has progressed so quickly is that no one--not even MassResistance--wants to talk or think about the perverted behavior of anal intercourse, or the incredible promiscuity in the "gay" lifestyle. We have all averted our eyes, given the homosexuals the "privacy of their own bedrooms" (or public restrooms?). But we must get serious about the diseases spreading to the larger society, and the costs we are all absorbing for HIV/AIDS patient care.

Now we are hearing about increasing drug problems in the homosexual community. The Boston homosexual newspaper, Bay Windows, is very concerned about the crystal meth crisis. See "Our silence about crystal is killing us", Guest Opinion 2/3/05:

"With very few exceptions, the rise in crystal meth addiction among gay men is going unnocticed in Boston. About 10 years ago, methamphetimine made its way onto Boston's party circuit. Although the drug - also known as speed, crank, Tina, and Crissy - has become a huge problem, you wouldn't know it by the way we talk about it. Or, rather, you wouldn't know it because we don't talk about it at all. After all, we've all heard the stories about the all night sex parties. We've seen the profiles on Manhunt, a popular Web site that makes it easy to arrange sexual encounters, looking for "PNP", short for party and play. Party, of course, refers to the use of drugs, and nine times out of 10, the drug of choice is crystal meth. Over the last year or so many of us have also heard stories of guys who've lost their jobs, homes, partners and friends due to crystal meth addiction. We've also learned about some who've become infected with HIV as a result of their use of crystal meth, because - let's be real - while chemically induced with Tina, sexual risk management pretty much goes out the window."

Also, a new "rare sex disease" has appeared in New York City among the homosexual population. As NewsMax reported (Feb. 2, 2005) :

"[T]he strain is the same as that recently detected in Europe, the city's health commissioner said Wednesday. Lymphogranuloma venereum, or LGV, is a form of chlamydia that can damage the bowels and scar the anus... 'We know LGV increases the risk of the spread of HIV because it causes ulcers and bleeding,' [the city's health commissioner] said....Unprotected anal intercourse is the key risk factor for the spread of LGV."

Sunday, February 06, 2005

MassResistance: Guilty of HATE SPEECH ??

Article 8 Alliance and Parents' Rights Coalition volunteers just spent a weekend at the Vision New England evangelical Christian convention in Boston. They displayed a poster warning the churchgoing attendees that soon, unless they fought for their rights, their churches would be required by the state to perform same-sex "weddings". If their pastor were to criticize homosexuality, or their church were to refuse to hire an open homosexual, they may soon be charged with unlawful discrimination. Many who spoke with us understood and agreed, but some scoffed.

We are sometimes called alarmists for warning churches and individuals that they may soon be criminally charged with hate speech, should they dare to question the forced acceptance of homosexuality. But remember--it says in our Massachusetts constitution that we may not discriminate on the basis of "sexual orientation". That was the open door for the "same-sex marriage" ruling. And it will be the open door for HATE SPEECH prosecutions.

[To understand the dangers inherent in irrational linguistic inventions such as "sexual orientation", see the article by Scott D. Liveley, Esq., Deciphering "Gay" Word-Speak and Language of Confusion.]

The Swedes, at least a decade more "progressive" than us backwards Americans, have taken that next step. They're prosecuting and and sentencing to prison religious dissenters. The Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) has an update on the Swedish pastor convicted of a hate crime for daring to preach that homosexuality is a sin (first reported in the Washington Post on 1/29/05). Why don't they arrest pastors for preaching on the sinfulness of adultery, theft, or murder?

[From the TVC report:]
February 3, 2005 – Pastor Ake Green is challenging Sweden’s hate crime law for a sermon he preached against homosexuality in the summer of 2003. Green’s ordeal is chronicled in the Washington Post (January 29, 2005). In his sermon against homosexuality, Green said that homosexual behavior is a “deep cancerous tumor in the entire society” and that his nation is facing a disaster of major proportions.
Green’s sermon was published in a local newspaper and he was indicted and convicted of hate speech and sentenced to 30 days in jail. He has remained free pending an appeal.
Pastor Green’s sermon was considered hate speech because Sweden expanded its hate crime law in 2002 to add “sexual orientation” as a protected class.
Pastor Green said that if his sentence is upheld, it “will diminish freedom of speech in Sweden, and that will mean we can’t teach everything the Bible says. They’ll go further and say we can’t preach about other things, either.”
Green’s ordeal in Sweden is a forewarning of the persecution that awaits Christian preachers here in the United States if states continue to add “sexual orientation” to hate crime laws.

The Power of Ex-Gays' Testimonies

I met Stephen Bennett and his wife Irene a few nights ago. How moving to hear an ex-gay's testimony -- and no wonder the radical homosexuals are pretending they don't exist! Stephen was in Newton to do a local cable TV interview, hoping to provide a little balance to the craziness afoot in the Newton public schools. [See "Promoting Perversion at a Massachusetts High School" below, and the WorldNetDaily article.]

Stephen's heartfelt songs about the joy of his (real) marriage and his two young children really hit hard, in light of the evil farce of "same-sex marriage". What pain he & his wife must feel watching this spectacle unfold, after he found the truth, and "became the man God intended him to be."

From his song, "The Rock":
Caught up in the life, I just could not break free;
They told me I was born that way.
But deep inside my heart, I knew that they were wrong;
I never believed just what they said.
For years I lived a deep, dark secret life, filled with pain.
And then one day His Word confronted me--
And showed me they were all so wrong. ..."

Check out his website.

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

The Resistance is Alive and Well in Massachusetts!

Is Massachusetts really so different from the rest of the country? For sure, the resistance has been beaten down for years in this state. Blame the unions, the universities, the Eastern "elites", the spineless RINOs, whatever. But now they've all gone way too far, and the resistance movement is growing! We will not stand for the recruitment of our children into a perverted, unhealthy "lifestyle". We will not stand for judicial tyranny. And we will not stand for the acquiescence by our fearful legislators and governor--who CAN stop homosexual "marriage" at any time by removal of the four rogue judges, but are scared of being called names. Whatever happened to clear thinking, moral standards, and courage? Join the grassroots movement to demand leadership and action from our elected officials!

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

PRESIDENT Romney?? Not unless he repents on same-sex "marriage"!!

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has his sights set on the Presidency. The Boston Globe reports that a PAC (political action committee) supporting a Romney run for President in 2008 is pumping money into key battleground states. Doesn't Romney understand from the 2004 election that the rest of the country won't stand for waffling--or worse, capitulation--on the issue of same-sex "marriage"???

Well, his PAC had better talk to Article 8 Alliance here in Massachusetts. They have exposed his double-dealing on the issue of same-sex "marriage". Romney has tried to present himself as its opponent (in his Wall Street Journal editorial and speech at the Republican convention). But we in Massachusetts know better!

As Chief Executive, Romney could have stopped same-sex "marriage". But he spinelessly went along with the dictate of our Supreme Judicial Court, revealing a total lack of respect for our Constitution and the separation of powers! He ordered the Department of Public Health to proceed with the bureaucratic support for these travesty "marriages". THANKS TO ROMNEY, our marriage licenses now read "Party A and Party B", instead of "husband and wife". He told our Justices of the Peace that they must perform such weddings, or resign their posts. (And a few of them did resign.)

Romney has also continued to support the radical homosexual agenda in our public schools, by funding the so-called "gay-straight alliance" clubs in our high schools (which are nothing more than brainwashing and recruitment centers into this unhealthy, dangerous "lifestyle"). In May 2004, Romney issued a proclamation celebrating the Gay Youth Pride Day in Boston (just two days before the same-sex "marriage" circus began). Our young teenagers proceeded from a parade to a "Gay Prom" at Boston City Hall Plaza, where kids as young as 12 and 13 were allowed to mingle with cruising homosexual adults up to the age of 25. Governor Romney thinks this is worth celebrating!

Lesbian "Buster" Episode Showing Feb. 2

Boston's PBS station, WGBH, will show the lesbian families episode of Postcards from Buster [see our commentary below] on Feb. 2 at 5:30 p.m. The Boston Globe reports that the decision to broadcast it now, instead of delaying it until late March, was made "in light of [U.S. Secy. of Education] Spelling's comments, PBS's decision [to pull the episode], and a blitz of media coverage." A spokeswoman for WGBH said, "We felt that it was in the interest of our audience to have the opportunity to see the program and form their own opinion about it, rather than rely on the descriptions of others." According to the Globe, the show targets 6- to 10-year olds, and is "a program about diversity".