Tuesday, May 02, 2006

How Many Homosexuals Really Want to "Marry"?

Is the demand for homosexual "marriage" a disingenuous political tool? Only a small percentage of the estimated homosexual populations in the Netherlands, Belgium, or Massachusetts have "married". Bear in mind that Massachusetts is a "magnet" state for homosexuals who do want to "marry" in this country. (And note that the story inaccurately reports that such "marriage" is "legal" in Massachusetts.)

Apr 26, 2006
Study Assesses How Many Gays Marry if Legal
By DAVID CRARYAP National Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- A new study attempts to gauge the percentage of gays and lesbians who have chosen to marry in places where that option is legal, with estimates ranging from as little as 2 percent to more than 16 percent, depending on the location.

A co-author of the report, released Wednesday, said both sides in the gay marriage debate may take heart from the findings.

The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, which opposes gay marriage, reviewed data from the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and Massachusetts, all of which allow same-sex partners to wed.

In each case, the study offered a range of estimates of the percentage of gays who had married, based on varying approximations - from 1 percent to 5 percent - of how many gays were in the general population.

In the Netherlands, where 8,127 same-sex couples married from April 1, 2001, through last December, the study said this represented between 2.6 percent and 6.3 percent of the country's gays and lesbians.

The study estimated that between 2 percent and 5 percent of Belgium's gays and lesbians, and 5.9 percent to 16.7 percent of those in Massachusetts had married. Same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in May 2004, and 7,341 gay and lesbians couples had wed there through last December.
[Read more ...]

Monday, May 01, 2006

Brave New World = Fatherless Children

The world of the future. Single-mom households, children with no father. Two-mom households, children with no father. And don't forget the two-dad households who somehow adopt children who will know no mother. From the Family Research Council:

Life Without Father
The tykes' smiling pictures confront us in today's Washington Post. They are the children of "Donor 401." He is a German, we know, and he's a sperm donor who has fathered at least 25 children--that we know of. Fairfax (VA) Cryobank is proud of its role in this project. Still anonymous, Donor 401 is nonetheless a hot commodity on TV talk shows. The kids shown appear to be blond, blue-eyed.

Women who have been inseminated with his sperm have appeared with Meredith Vieira on "The View." The "Today" show featured a story on this phenomenon. And Comedy Central's Steve Colbert claimed facetiously to be Donor 401. "Obviously, the kids will ask questions someday," said one of the women who set up an online registry to link up the children who are biologically half-brothers and sisters, "and having this connection will help." Oh yes, they will definitely ask questions someday. And some of these parents may not be entirely prepared to answer.

We used to view with horror the idea of intentionally depriving children of a relationship with their father--and with their brothers and sisters. Now it has become almost a sport, a lark, a subject for daytime TV talk show fun. It is a direct and dehumanizing attack on the family.

Mushy Republicans Again

John Haskins has another excellent article on mushy Republicans and conservatives who can't face the truth, this time on Alan Keyes' website, Renew America:

"Bush DID make history on the White House lawn...and every politically astute liberal knows it."
By John Haskins (April 29, 2006)

More denial, folks. As always, every politically aware liberal and homosexual activist in the country knows what many on "Our Side" have scrambled to deny. Here's a little reality pill to nibble on: another incremental surrender DID occur and history WAS made in this White House Easter Egg Roll, in an almost irreversible way. Homosexuals, bearing their trophy children — helpless prisoners in the War Against Future Generations — were welcomed without so much as blink of an eye at a family event on a high Christian holy day.

Make no mistake: those who plot and scheme tirelessly against the innocence of our children, and against our rights as parents to defend them and who have sworn enmity against our God, know that they won that Easter egg roll and we lost. No, once again, we didn't lose. We surrendered. Our specialty. And we then chastised those among us who warned against one more polite, quiet, peaceful, dignified, lazy, little surrender.

Why don't pro-family people understand how much the "little" things like this advance society's acceptance of homosexual "families," homosexual child rearing and homosexual "marriages?" How blind can we be? ...
[Read more ...]

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Shame on Mass. Republicans

From MassResistance's reporter at the state Republican convention today, Saturday, April 29.

The Massachusetts Republican Party is at its weakest ever. This is because they are not Republicans any more. Shame on the party leadership. They have clearly joined the Culture of Death, proclaiming their pro-abortion stance -- even celebrating it at a cocktail party! And the state committee allowed sodomy "marriage" advocates to have an information table at Saturday's state party convention.

MassEquality passing out its propaganda at a Republican convention!? Bad enough that in 2004, Republican candidates were instructed to avoid the issue of homosexual "marriage". But now the party is apparently welcoming MassEquality's message. No -- a party convention is not a free speech zone. Exhibitors should be in accord with the principles of the party. Does the Massachusetts Republican Party now officially support homosexual "marriage"?! We'll have to check on this...

Planned Parenthood also had a table at the convention. And at the end of the day on Saturday, "Republicans for Choice" threw a cocktail reception. Here's the flyer that was circulating:

Immediately following the Republican Convention
Join the Massachusetts Coalition for Choice at the kick-off event for the
Keynote Speaker: Lieutenant Governor and Gubernatorial Candidate Kerry Healey
Other Speakers:
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Darlee Crockett, National Co-chair of Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
SATURDAY APRIL 29th 2006, 2pm (or end of convention if later) Brewery exchange, 3rd floor Playloft: 201 Cabot St. in Lowell
- light hors d'oeuvres served - cash bar
Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey
Lieutenant Governor Candidate Reed Hillman
Governor William F. Weld
Governor Argeo Paul Cellucci
The Honorable Jane Swift
Darlee Crockett, national Co-chair, Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice
Massachusetts State Senator Brian Lees
Massachusetts State Senator Richard Tisei
Massachusetts State Rep0resentative Karyn Polito
Massachusetts State Representative Mary Rogeness
Massachusetts State Representative Sue Pope
Massachusetts State Representative Virginia Coppola
The Honorable Jody Dow
The Honorable Patrick Guerriero
Sarah Chamberlain Resnick, Executive Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Jonathan Stevens, Public Policy Director of the Republican Mainstreet Partnership
Ann Blackham, Ann Murphy, Bill Saltonstall, Jenny Armini, Lucile P. Hicks, Lyman Wood, Nancy J. Luther, Polly Logan, William Sawyer

Thursday, April 27, 2006

MR Editor Attends Real Wedding!

We'll be taking a few days off to attend a REAL wedding on the West Coast-- one man + one woman. Back on Monday.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

School Risk Audit: Are Your Schools Promoting Homosexuality?

Parents and community members need to document exactly what's happening in their own schools. Here's a tool which might help.

From Robert Knight at the Culture & Family Institute of Concerned Women for America: Groups Endorse ‘School Risk Audit’ to Expose ‘Gay’ Agenda in Schools (4/25/06).

Are your local schools promoting homosexuality? There’s a new way to find out.

A coalition of pro-family groups is urging parents to do a “School Risk Audit” to determine whether and how the schools have become conduits for homosexual activism.

Concerned Women for America (CWA) has joined with Mission America, American Family Association, Citizens for Community Values, Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, Americans for Truth, Exodus Mandate, and several state organizations (see below at end of article) to recommend a “School Risk Audit” inspired by a resolution passed in 2005 by the Southern Baptist Convention and developed by Mission America President Linda Harvey.

Parents can download the audit form and use any portion they wish or the entire document. The Audit includes recommendations for parental action in the wake of the survey, such as how to alert school authorities and how to issue a press release.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Schools' Legal Liability in Promoting Homosexual Sex

Schools across America are going to start experiencing lawsuits over their criminal seduction of our young people into the unhealthy GLBT "lifestyle". Check out this resource from PFOX (Parents & Friends of ExGays & Gays). It makes a great gift for your local school committee, superintendent, and principal.

"The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools: An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior in public schools." Topics include:

-Endangering the physical health of a child (STDs, HPV, promoting unsafe sex, other risky behaviors); endangering the mental health of a child; schools unequipped to be mental health clinics; contributing to delinquency of a child; recommended reading for children?; the Massachusetts model; unconstitutional restriction of First Amendment rights.

Monday, April 24, 2006

PFOX Resources to Combat "Day of Silence"

Check out the ex-gay perspective on countering the poisonous message of gay-straight alliances. See PFOX's website. That's "Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays".

For example, see: "How to Respond to a Gay/Straight Alliance (GSA) Club at your school (a correct response to the anti-ex-gay group GLSEN): Ten Steps to Success by using ex-gay resources to fight bigotry."

And to hand out on the "Day of Silence", here's their downloadable pamphlet for teens: Feelings Change: They are Only One Part of You..."

Propaganda Assault This Wednesday 4-26: "Day of Silence" in High Schools

Have you called your high school yet to ask the principal if there will be a homosexual propaganda assault -- deceptively named the "Day of Silence" -- this Wednesday, April 26? And if there will be, why hasn't he informed parents of this event which promotes homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism? Massachusetts law (Ch. 71, Sec. 32A) requires parental notification, and ability to opt out their children when human sexuality issues are brought up in the schools.

The principals will surely tell you that it's a student-run event and not part of the curriculum. This is a lie. The event is run by the radical, national GLBT advocacy group GLSEN, and supported by school administrations. (See quote below -- from the horse's mouth.) If you wonder about this claim, ask yourself if Operation Rescue would be allowed to have day of civil disobedience promoting the pro-life cause.

We've published the list of high schools with gay clubs ("Gay-Straight Alliances"), based on GLSEN's list from last year, newspaper accounts, and our own first-hand knowledge, and GLSEN's national website posts a list of Massachusetts high school clubs. The Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth will not answer our request for an up-to-date list, and the Mass. Dept. of Education Safe Schools office plays ignorant. The Governor's office said they'd help us get this list two weeks ago, but we've still not received anything.

According to Bay Windows, "[I]n 2001 ... GLSEN took charge of the event. Under GLSEN’s leadership the Day of Silence quickly expanded to thousands of high schools across the country and became GLSEN’s signature event. ... Sean Haley, executive director of GLSEN Boston, said he expects students at between 125-150 schools in the state to take part in the event this year. He said schools in the Boston area have been honoring the Day of Silence since GLSEN first took over planning the event in 2001. [emphasis added]

Sunday, April 23, 2006

False Report in Bay Windows Corrected

Bay Windows tried to make MassResistance/Article 8 appear ineffectual, publishing a "news story" that a protest against the concert by the Boston Gay Men's Chorus at the Concord-Carlisle High School "fizzled". Well, MassResistance/Article 8 never called for a demonstration! Bay Windows did run our correction in their "Letters to the Editor" column this week:

How not to celebrate Palm Sunday

The headline (see “Article 8 Protest of Boston Gay Men’s Chorus Fizzles,” April 13) states that Article 8 called for a protest of the BGMC concert at Concord-Carlisle HS on Sunday, April 9.
They did no such thing.

Article 8 supporters would not turn out for a protest on Palm Sunday. The idea of that concert on that day was so repugnant that no one would go anywhere near it! We were simply getting the news out that the event was on the calendar. Many people then contacted the school administrators.

Please correct your misleading headline and story.

Charles Liung, MassResistance

[Bay Windows] Editor’s note: Bay Windows would never presume to understand how the members of a group like Article 8/MassResistance celebrate religious holidays like Palm Sunday.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

"Surrender with Dignity" Conservatives

MassResistance just received a letter from "Focus on the Family Action" center, wherein we're urged to participate in VoteOnMarriage's lobbying push for its flawed amendment (prior to the anticipated May 10 Constitutional Convention). If you've been following this blog, you'll know we have grave reservations about this proposed amendment.

If you're still in doubt about this, read the latest from John Haskins (below). And in case you missed it, check out Haskins' WorldNetDaily article (Dec. 2005) revealing the truth on how homosexual "marriage" actually came about in Massachusetts: Conservative Romney Buckles and Blunders."

Are the "Surrender with Dignity" Conservatives leading us over a cliff?
By John Haskins

The colossal resources being put into ratifying a new Massachusetts marriage amendment are based on a complete misunderstanding of the void legal and constitutional status of Governor Romney's homosexual "marriages". This proposed amendment faces possibly insurmountable obstacles. If it fails, it will break the spirit of many grassroots activists who are sacrificing much in the desperate hope that this amendment would restore moral sanity and legal order to Massachusetts.

This amendment -- if it somehow gets past a politically and morally debauched legislature -- would ignore the phony homosexual "marriages" that now violate the laws of Massachusetts. This is largely unknown to many of the pro-family activists who have been asked to sacrifice time and money in order to roll the wrong boulder up the wrong hill. This amendment would enshrine the principle that our laws and our state Constitution are subject to judges and governors striking them down, when they have the Boston Globe -- and the obsessively pro-establishment pro-family groups -- "Vichy Christians" (as one national pro-family political consultant has called them) -- handling the cover-up for a supposed "conservative" governor. This governor, Mitt Romney, has sponsored a gay youth pride parade, has called pro-family activists "right-wing religious bigots", and tried to banish the anti-homosexuality Boy Scouts from the Winter Olympics in 2002.

All of the major players in this Massachusetts fraud know that Gov. Romney's homosexual "marriages" are illegal. Gov. Romney knows it. His advisors know it. Much of the state legislature knows it. Many homosexual activists know it. The homosexual activists editing the Boston Globe know it. The four judges who tried to trick the legislature into legalizing homosexual "marriage" know it.

So -- almost everyone understands the fraud -- except the "Vichy Christians." They seem to believe that if a governor is handsome enough and clean-cut enough and looks pro-family, then he must be on "our side" -- even if he ordered state officials to either violate their oaths to uphold the law (which remains one-man, one-woman) or resign. For some bizarre reason, "Matinee Mitt" just couldn't wait to see if the Legislature would agree with the four judges and change the law to legalize homosexual "marriages." "Our side" signed an unconditional surrender when they accepted the legality of Gov. Romney's illegal homosexual "marriage" licenses.

Gov. Romney's order violated the laws of the Commonwealth and the people's Constitution.
If the Governor had had the constitutional authority to act, the four Supreme Judicial Court justices would have told him to! They did not. They told the legislature to change the law, which as the judges knew, is the only way that homosexual "marriage" could gain any measure of legality. They legislature did not change the law! [In fact, there is a bill pending, sponsored by the homosexual lobby, to do just that, proving they know it's still not legal! -MR]

So Gov. Romney solved the problem: He ordered state officials to violate the law. If Mike Dukakis or another Democrat governor had done this, he never could have gotten away with it. If Gov. Weld, Cellucci, or Swift had done this, they could never have gotten away with it. But because a handsome, churchy-looking governor did it, all the while protesting that he really, really, really hated doing it [but "had to uphold the law" -MR], most of our side signed up for the fox's campaign to keep the wolves out of the chicken house.

A further note: One of the most prominent pro-family leaders behind this amendment told me three months ago, "You're right. We need a strategy." [Admitting: "And we don't have one." -MR] This was already several years into the battle. But do you really need a battle strategy after you've surrendered the whole war?

Again, please read the article on WorldNetDaily [from this past December].

MassResistance note: Strategies were initiated by Article 8 Alliance which would have attacked the core of the problem -- judicial tyranny, as well as targeting the Governor's proposed actions on issuance of "marriage" certificates. Why did the "Vichy Christians" refuse to join that effort to remove the judges, as well as pressure the Governor to withhold "marriage" licenses?

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Spring Vacation

Spring Vacation week at MassResistance blog. But as you can see from the MassResistance website, we're still resisting!

Monday, April 17, 2006

MFI: Politeness Is the Chief Virtue

Bay Windows reports that Mass. Family Institute (MFI) thinks we're rude (!) and they're "distancing" themselves from the likes of us. (Yes, they appear to have spoken with Bay Windows! Why?)

It seems MFI sent a letter to all the Massachusetts state legislators begging them not to confuse them (MFI) with Article 8/MassResistance or the Pawlicks (Mass. Citizens for Marriage).

MFI is the group behind the current horribly flawed marriage amendment. Tight with Dr. James Dobson's Focus on the Family, they like to be polite. They seem not to realize that the barbarians are at the gates. They don't think it's polite to reveal the unpleasant truth about homosexuality, or speak passionately to our representatives.

MFI believes it's a good political strategy to redefine "family" to include the new "families" made since same-sex "marriages" began in May 2004. And it's a REALLY good idea to send openly gay, activist legislators VERY POLITE postcards asking them to PLEASE "Let the people vote!" -- to confirm this ghastly redefinition of the family. An example of very polite testimony from MFI for their amendment:

The amendment is quite limited, as it only relates to "marriage" as such and says nothing one way or the other about benefits, civil unions, domestic partnerships-which are left to legislative rather than constitutional determination. It also only operates prospectively, and will not undo existing same-sex marriages that have been entered into under the authority of the Goodridge decision. ... Only the union of male and female can beget offspring, and only wives and husbands can provide children with a married mother and a father, which is the ideal arrangement for raising children. Obviously other parenting arrangements are possible, and they are allowed by law; but these should not be allowed to undermine the sense that children being raised by a married mother and father is optimal. Preserving the traditional definition of marriage is the least that can be done to make that point.

And MFI wants to distance itself from Brian Camenker (Brian -- who is brave enough to expose things like "Fistgate" and the "Little Black Book"), and the Pawlicks (who were behind the clean marriage amendment of a few years back). Now what did we do to earn the reputation of being "rude"? We suggested to citizens that it's OK to contact legislators at home if they can't reach them at their offices. (Reps did choose to run for public office, after all; and they must have caller ID and voice mail; and can choose not to answer their phones if they're eating dinner!) Or to demand that our reps preserve parental rights. Or that it's OK for citizens to be angry that there are bills filed by Mass. legislators advocating the de-criminalization of bestiality.

No, says MFI, don't be angry -- remain polite and calm. Beg -- but with poise -- for your voting rights. Everything will be OK. And don't be distracted by Article 8/MassResistance's alerts identifying those dangerous bills! (Reminds us of the videos of captured Westerners begging for their lives as the terrorists are about to shoot them in the head, or decapitate them. Weak and hopeless.)

Princeton Professor & "Celebrated Writer" Rents Boys

More truth on the homosexual "lifestyle". (In case you missed it, check out the article from the New Oxford Review which we recently highlighted.)

Time Out New York (TONY) magazine interviews Princeton professor Edmund White on his autobiography, My Lives in this week's issue (April 13-19): "The naughty professor: Celebrated gay writer and Princetonian Edmund White gets graphic in his memoir." He proudly describes his "gay" perversions, including his love of S&M and hustlers. From the TONY interview:

There's ... plenty of explicit sex, from his childhood seductions of neighborhood boys in Cincinnati to a rather recent, very complicated S&M affair with a much younger man. ...

TONY: Does it embarrass you at all to write so candidly about your sexual encounters?

EW: ... I love being very honest in my writing. To me, it’s like a sacred obligation, but I’m actually rather reserved in real life.

TONY: You write that you’re a masochist who doesn’t like pain. How does that jibe?

EW: The appeal for me is more about the rituals and the humiliation, which is mostly verbal. It’s a game, I suppose, but a serious game that touches many deep feelings. People who genuinely like receiving or inflicting real pain are very much in the minority, even among the S&M crowd.

TONY: One of the chapters in your book is called “My Hustlers.” Do rent boys play an important part in your life?

EW: I’ve always liked them, and they are very convenient in some ways. If you want to make yourself stay home and write, you just order somebody to come up at midnight. And they’re usually cheaper than what it costs to go out on a date.

It's not surprising that White had horrible relations with his parents. The Princeton WeeklBulletin writes:

As a writer on the vanguard of the gay rights movement, White felt the book needed “a lot more about relationships and sex and probably a little less about the professional details of my career.” There are some graphic scenes depicting White’s sex life, but the most compelling parts of the book are his characterizations of his parents: his mother, a squat, overdressed Texan whose “egotism and incessant chatter could be truly punishing;” and his father, a tyrannical, reclusive misanthrope whose son failed to interest him.

“I tried to portray them as honestly as I could, but it was painful going back into all that stuff, especially the chapter on my father. I never really let myself think that much about it,” said White, whose parents died more than a decade ago. He worried about his sister’s reaction to the book, but “after she read it, she said, ‘Oh God, you let our parents off so lightly. They were much more monstrous than that.’ ” [emphasis added]

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Palm Sunday Event in Concord Haunts Easter Celebrations

The American Family Association's news, Agape Press, is following the homosexual propaganda fundraiser concert at the Concord-Carlisle High School last week. The horrible event on Palm Sunday certainly soured many of our Easter celebrations!

"PFLAG's Palm Sunday Fundraiser Gets Attention of Massachusetts Activist."

Saturday, April 15, 2006

"Wicked" Author Struts His "Gay" Parenting

Last week's Judiciary Committee hearing on VoteOnMarriage's proposed amendment brought out many of the older, well-dressed "alternative families" and poised professional same-sex couples, pleading that their "marriages" and "families" not be disrupted. (It's only hateful people who would argue that thousands of years of cross-cultural traditions and the Bible are correct in defining marriage as a man and a woman!) Noticeably absent were college-age or younger rabble-rousers. Clearly, the strategy was to present same-sex headed households as "your best neighbors", the professional or author next door, the stable parents who are just as good as you heteronormative parents -- if not better, because they won't bring their child up with hateful prejudices!

Notable was the celebrity appearance by the author of Wicked ("The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West"), now a hit Broadway musical. With a his sleeping adopted Asian son on his shoulder and "husband" standing nearby, Gregory Maguire (a Mass. resident) explained how, as a "gay", he was able to conceive the character of the horribly wronged green witch.

Elphaba, "the little-green skinned girl ... [was] a smart, prickly, and misunderstood creature who challenges all our preconceived notions about the nature of good and evil." She was terribly discriminated against, because through no fault of her own she was born green. And of course, she wasn't really wicked. It was just a big conspiracy by the nasty society she lived in. And in the end, that horrible Dorothy killed her, though she had done nothing wrong!

Any time you hear of some new hit novel or musical dealing with discrimination, there's a good chance it's really all about discrimination against homosexuals, and how evil traditional society is. (New York Newsday calls Wicked a "political cautionary tale".) Homosexuals are just like the green witch: they were born that way. So accept them as they are! Stop discriminating!

Friday, April 14, 2006

A Good Day to Speak the Truth

A good day to speak the truth: There is no compromising with evil.

We remember being asked if pro-lifers could find any compromise position with the pro-abortion crowd. How ridiculous. Maybe we could agree to only half of the requested abortions each year? Or maybe we could agree to let Planned Parenthood instruct our high school girls where to go to get abortions, as long as we have equal time to instruct them on the humanity of the developing baby? We don't think so! The only morally correct -- and politically effective -- position is to say all abortions are murder. And say NO altogether to Planned Parenthood having any access to children in the schools!

Similarly, why is it that some traditionalists think we can find some common ground with GLSEN? That we can let GLSEN preach their poison in our schools, and then try to counteract it with a "Day of Truth"? How much poison is too much? Put that effort into getting GLSEN out of the schools altogether, we say.

Another example: Why do some in the pro-family movement in our state think they can placate homosexual extremists by letting them keep some of their "marriages", by offering them benefits packages, and by promising not to ban civil unions? Why should the state sanction any alternative domestic arrangement as a "family"? How much state-sanctioned perversion is too much?

There can be no compromise with evil.

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Lesson at Concord-Carlisle High School

Here's what they're teaching at Concord Carlisle High School. Or was it preaching? It was on Palm Sunday, after all, that the Boston Gay Men's Chorus performed a fundraiser there for an extremist homosexual political activist group (PFLAG).

Lyrics to a song on the program:

Everything Possible by Fred Small
You can be anybody you want to be.
You can love whomever you will.
You can travel any country where your heart leads
And know I will love you still.
You can live by yourself, you can gather friends around.
You can choose one special one
And the only measure of your words and your deeds
Will be the love you leave behind when you're done.
There are girls who grow up strong and bold.
There are boys quiet and kind.
Some race on ahead, some follow behind.
Some go in their own way and time.
Some women love women, some men love men.
Some raise children, some never do.
You can dream all the day never reaching the end
Of everything possible for you.
Don't be rattled by names, by taunts, by games
But seek out spirits true.
If you give your friends the best part of yourself
They will give the same back to you.

Also on the program was a take-off on the Shakespeare song, "It was a lover and his lass" (in As You Like It), revised as "It was a lover and his lad." From the recent Article 8 Alliance/MassResistance email alert:

Public school officials in Massachusetts seem to be looking for creative ways to push the homosexual agenda in the most offensive ways possible. This Sunday -- Palm Sunday -- the Concord-Carlisle High School (CCHS) in Concord, MA, has invited the Boston Gay Men's Chorus to give a homosexual-oriented concert as a fundraiser for the Boston chapter of "Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays" (PFLAG), one of the most aggressive homosexual groups in the country.

PFLAG is second only to the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in homosexual activism in the public schools. They are heavily represented in schools in Massachusetts and around the country. Their primary focus is to organize various "allies", such as left-wing churches, individuals, and liberal community groups, as a united front to persuade children that homosexuality is normal and natural and that kids will get their support if they choose to engage in homosexual behavior....

This week one local resident, a mother of kids who had gone through CCHS, was outraged. She called the principal, Mr. Arthur DuLong. She asked him who made the decision to allow this group in the school. "I made the decision," he told her. She started to tell him how offensive it was to people in the community that such a thing should be celebrated in their school on Palm Sunday. The principal replied to her, "Your statements are outrageous. I'm going to end this conversation." And he hung up the phone.

Monday, April 10, 2006

Queer Confusion at Tufts Conference

A "Safe Colleges" conference was recently held at Tufts. Why are these people's ideas taken seriously? Just read this sampling of seminars from that event, and you'll see their confusion. They don't know what to call themselves; whether or not their "sexual orientation" is inborn ("Does bisexuality even exist?" they ask); what role trauma plays in their development; what the difference is between sexuality and sexual identity; etc. But we must give them everything they want, even when they can't define who they are or what they want.

Bisexuality 101: Myths and Realities. What is bisexuality? Is there no such thing as bisexuality or is everyone really bisexual? Or is it more complicated than that? In this workshop we will examine these questions as well as biphobia in lesbian, gay and heterosexual communities with the goal of better understanding bisexuality and bisexual identities -- and identities in general. People of all sexual orientations are welcome to attend.
Robyn Ochs is a long-time activist, and the editor of the Bisexual Resource Guide and the new anthology Getting Bi: Voices of Bisexuals Around the World. She has taught courses in Tufts' Experimental College on topics including GLBT history & politics in the United States, the politics of sexual orientation, and the experiences of those of us who transgress the binary categories of gay/straight, masculine/feminine, black/white and/or male/female. Her writings have been published in numerous bisexual, women's studies, multicultural, and GLBT anthologies. She lives in Massachusetts, and on May 17th, 2004—on the first day it was legal—she married Peg Preble, her long-time partner. She is a professional speaker and workshop leader.

Choosing to Label: What's in a Name. Bi, lesbian, gay, straight, queer, questioning, choose-not-to-label. How do you decide what words to use to describe yourself? What are the advantages of choosing a label? What are the disadvantages? Why do other people care so much what you call yourself? This will be a participatory workshop, and all are welcome.
Robyn Ochs

Tools for Building Trans-inclusive College Communities. All too often, the “T” in LGBT is merely an afterthought. However, a growing number of college students are embracing transgender labels. Join us for a discussion of the many ways to make schools more welcoming for transgender and genderqueer students, faculty and staff....Led by members of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition ...

Queer Theory, Queer Sex, Queer Politics. In this workshop, students will have the opportunity to investigate some of the concepts and arguments fundamental to current developments in queer theory. We will explore, in particular, a recent debate in queer studies about the idea of "queer love" as a political practice. What is the relationship between sex and politics? Theory and sex? Politics and theory? Is a politics of love viable for queers? What if "Love Won Out," after all?

A graduate student in the Tufts University English Department, Ashley Shelden specializes in queer theory, film, and 20th Century British Literature.

Sexual Identity and Trauma: Navigating Both, Understanding Each. This workshop will explore sexual identity in the context of growing up in a less-than-perfect home environment. We will discuss how trauma and abuse can shape our sexuality and not our identities and, why there is limited research in this area compared to our heterosexual counterparts. The emphasis here is not on sharing details or memories but rather on discussing/understanding how the multiple identities of being queer and a survivor, in addition to our race and class identities, affect us in the present.
Kathy Girod is the Coordinator of the Rainbow Lounge at MIT where she runs groups on coming-out and healthy/un-healthy relationships. She also facilitates a coming-out group for LBT women at the Women's Center in Cambridge and, sits on the board of The Network/La Red, an organization that works to end abuse in the Queer Community. She is a Master's candidate at Simmons College of Social Work and graduates in May.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Cancel "Day of Silence" Say Lexington Citizens

Citizens for Freedom
P.O. Box 471
Lexington, MA 02420

An Important Message about the “Day of Silence”

To Our Friends and Supporters in Lexington:

For many parents and residents of Lexington, it is not acceptable to have the public schools taking sides, or even appearing to take sides, in the contentious political and cultural battles that mark the so-called “culture wars.” Last year the town gained national notoriety after a parent was arrested while protesting the schools’ unwillingness to accommodate his request to be notified so that he could withdraw his young son from classroom programs that teach issues of human sexuality from a perspective contrary to his personal values.

Many of these programs may appear harmless individually. But taken as a whole, they could reasonably be construed to present a political position on the part of the Lexington school administration. Students get the message that there is a right way to look at these issues (represented by the schools’ point of view) and a wrong way, represented by reactionary or bigoted parents. The divisive results of this policy were seen last year, and will be seen again this year.

A central aspect of the controversy is the normalization of homosexual relationships. Since the Supreme Court of Massachusetts ruled in the Goodridge decision that homosexuals could not be denied the right to marry, many believe the matter has been settled and there is no longer any reasonable ground for debate within the community. They believe that homosexual relationships are fully equal to heterosexual relationships, both before the law, and in terms of societal value. Thus they believe the teachings in the schools must reflect and encourage the acceptance of this change.

The reality, however, is quite different. Nothing approaching a consensus on this issue exists anywhere in the country. The entire issue remains a contentious and emotional one.

It is even more difficult when children are brought into the picture at a young age. Clearly, it is much easier to influence the opinions of the next generation if you are the first to teach them, while their minds are still immature and impressionable. The problem is that even in a town as liberal as Lexington, many parents do not wish their children to be taught that homosexuality is the equal of heterosexuality as a lifestyle choice. This has nothing to do with the fact that all people regardless of personal background are entitled to the protection of the laws on an equal basis.

The matter is only made worse when parents who do object are branded as bigots or haters, and when the school administrators refuse to listen; and when virtually the entire town government lines up at a demonstration disparaging the legitimate rights of residents who object to their children being used as pawns in a cultural battle.

CFF believes there is a constitutional requirement for the schools to remain strictly neutral with respect to religious, political or cultural particularities. As an example, students in the local schools come from a variety of religious backgrounds, including no religion. No one is suggesting that the schools must assert that all these religions, including atheism, are equally good and valid positions. No one is suggesting such an approach is necessary in order for children from these differing backgrounds to feel equally accepted in the school environment, or that the failure to do so constitutes some kind of discrimination.

Schools must be places where children from various backgrounds can feel at home without the pressures to conform to one or the other side in contentious political or religious disputes. We believe the schools can be made safe and welcoming places without involving students in the issues that divide and inflame their parents. To the contrary, the very introduction of these disputes makes the schools more divided, less safe, and less welcoming for all.

There are many ways in which mutual respect and tolerance can be taught in the schools. The coerced acceptance of non-traditional sexuality is not one of them.

What follows is an Open Letter to Dr. Paul Ash and the Lexington School Committee, which asks them to disassociate the schools from the upcoming Day of Silence and from the organizations that promote it. ... It will be sent to Dr. Ash and the members of the School Committee, and published in a local paper. ...

If you are a Lexington resident we strongly urge you to endorse this letter. Email your response to citizensforfreedom@verizon.net and say, I endorse the Open Letter, The schools, the students, and the town as a whole will be better off when the schools are returned to neutrality around this and other divisive issues.

Posted by John Moriarty and Jed Snyder

An Open Letter to Dr. Paul Ash and the Lexington School Committee

April, 2006

We the undersigned members of the Lexington Community call upon Superintendent Paul Ash and the Lexington School Committee to disassociate the schools from the annual Day of Silence scheduled for this month. By endorsing this event, the school administration is needlessly dividing the community and putting the town at the risk of eventual litigation over constitutional violations.

Whatever positive results were supposed to come from this staged event, they have not materialized. To the contrary, the Day of Silence has resulted in a more divided community, with students demonstrating less tolerance, and more stress and name-calling on both sides. Last year this intolerance culminated in a physical assault on a student who peacefully dissented from this activity. Programs that purport to teach respect and tolerance should not result in physical assaults on peaceful students simply because they hold to a different set of values from those being promoted by the schools.

Moreover, it is not the business of the public schools to challenge students’ core beliefs and values by applying pressure, subtle or otherwise, to get them to conform their thinking to a particular political or cultural viewpoint. The considerable persuasive power of teachers as role models should be used to encourage those values the entire community can unite in embracing, not to choose sides in contentious cultural issues.

For students, there is no reasonable way to opt-out of the Day of Silence. It is a school wide, day long event. By endorsing this event, the school leadership is sending a strong message to all those who do not share the views of the event’s organizers that they are unwelcome in the schools when the Day of Silence and related programs are taking place.

Welcoming children and adults from a variety of backgrounds is a worthy goal we can support as a community. But we cannot all support the Day of Silence, or the views and actions of its organizers. Practicing toleration and respect does not mean we must endorse others’ lifestyle choices any more than it means we must endorse others’ religious choices. It does not mean that the gay community must be upheld year after year as history’s most prominent victims. Respect does not come through coercion, whether subtle or blunt.

The public schools belong to all the citizens of Lexington, not just those who subscribe to one favored point of view. The school administration has already demonstrated that it is incapable of guaranteeing the physical safety of students who do not wish to participate in this divisive annual ritual. This year, we urge you to take the first step in returning the public schools to the practice of political neutrality, where students, parents and teachers from a variety of backgrounds and beliefs can feel equally safe, welcomed and at home. Cancel the Day of Silence.

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

GLSEN Seminar: It Is All About "Queer Sex"

Don't miss this gem from the original article on the GLSEN/Fistgate conference in 2000. According to the queer activist (Margot Abels) currently suing Brian Camenker, Scott Whiteman, and Parents' Rights Coalition for exposing her hideous workshop (in March 2000): YES, IT IS ALL ABOUT QUEER SEX!

Tired of denying it: Margot Abels opened by telling the room full of teachers (and two high school students), "We always feel like we are fighting against people who deny publicly, who say privately, that being queer is not at all about sex... We believe otherwise. We think that sex is central to every single one of us and particularly queer youth."

So let's see, the queer activism in question would include: The story book about "different kinds of families" given to David Parker's kindergartner in Lexington. [Remember: Lexington activist Meg Soens, who got the book into the school, gave a seminar at that same GLSEN conference in 2000 on incorporating gay & lesbian issues in the elementary curriculum!]. The "Day of Silence". The Gay-Straight Alliance clubs in the high schools. Diversity Days. Ally Days. GLBT "rights" however you name them. It's all about queer sex.

Degradation at Weston HS - "Urinetown" a "Family-Friendly" Musical?

MassResistance is revolted once again. Why would any high school choose to produce Urinetown, a crass and degrading satirical musical with anti-corporate, environmentalist overtones? [This according to reviews - needless to say, we haven't seen it!]

Driving through beautiful Weston today, we saw signs advertising the upcoming production of Urinetown by the high school drama club. And sure enough, the local newspaper confirmed this appalling lack of decency in that most wealthy of Massachusetts towns. What sort of sick people are running our high schools? Has anyone in Weston spoken up? [From the Weston newspaper review:]

The plot deals with a dark vision of the future, when water is so scarce that people must pay to pee. Corporations grow fat off of the misery of the poor as they sing "Rich folks get the good life/Poor folks get the woe/In the end, it’s nothing you don’t know."

One day the fees are raised and a young man, after seeing his father taken off to "Urinetown" for free peeing, decides to lead a rebellion against "Urine Good Company," the oppressive monopoly which controls the water. His rebellion stirs the poor, as he cries in the obligatory Act One finale, "We’re suffering now such lives of sorrow - don’t give us tomorrow, just give us today!"

"Urinetown" mocks its own absurdity and pulls the audience in for two hours of nonstop laughs while simultaneously asking them to think about pressing environmental issues. Hailed as the freshest, edgiest theater to hit Broadway in years, this family-friendly and hilarious show is a guaranteed hit with all ages.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Rep. Gohmert on "Hate Crimes" & "Sexual Orientation"

One of the more entertaining and fearless people we heard at the Vision America conference in D.C. last week was Rep. Louie Gohmert, a former judge in Texas, elected U.S. Representative in 2004. We picked up a copy of one of his speeches, arguing against "hate crimes" legislation. Gohmert gets it: The very concept of "hate crimes" is irrational, and since the phrase "sexual orientation" is nowhere defined, it opens up the door to anything imaginable.

In the [Texas] dragging death case, I personally might support punishment by allowing the victim's despondent family to choose the rope or chain and the terrain over which to drag the heartless defendant to inflict the death penalty. But the hate crime laws do not offer a more painful form of capital punishment. The one yesterday [9-14-05] certainly does not, so it would have had absolutely no effect on the very cases its proponents often herald as poster examples.

What was done yesterday created a vague, ambiguous Federal offense which sends a message that random, senseless acts of violence are far more preferable in our society than such acts with a motive. Never mind that sociopaths or antisocial personalities who commit random, senseless acts of violence are unlikely to be rehabilitated. They will not get punished under this new law passed out of this House yesterday.

This new hate crimes bill that passed yesterday, this body said to the world that "sexual orientation" and not just "gender," which should be respected, but "gender identity," whatever that is, are in the same category as those unfortunate individuals who have suffered because of the color of their skin or their religious preference.

Have the Members ever stopped to think about the words "sexual orientation"? Regardless of what definition they may give those words, when we pass laws, the words used create an exceptional chance that at some point down the road someone is going to say the words mean exactly what they say. In the case of "sexual orientation," someday someone can look at those words and say they have the very meaning they state: That includes those who are sexually oriented towards animals, those who are sexually oriented towards corpses, those who are sexually oriented towards children. That is abominable. But someday those words could be cited by some appellate court as having their very plain meaning, not just the meaning that is socially or culturally accepted at the time they were passed.

There is another aspect that is not discussed or debated but is coming some day through this new law. It is true that the law addresses crimes of violence or attempted crimes of violence. However, under Article 18 U.S. Code 2(a) of the Federal Criminal Code, "whoever aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures' a crime's commission is punishable just as if he is the principal."

Do the Members understand what that means? Let me ask my colleagues if a Christian, Jewish, or Muslim religious leader teaches and preaches that homosexuality is wrong or is a sin and someone in the leader's flock commits a crime against a person who chooses to practice such acts, has the religious leader counseled or induced such an act through his or her teaching? Someday someone will say so, and ministers will be arrested for their preaching. They will be said to have incited such conduct through hateful teaching. As a matter of fact, some people already blame religious leaders for acts of violence in such cases, and I do not defend any minister who encourages such conduct. That should be punished.

They are wrong. But having harshly sentenced people who have committed crimes of hate, and also those who have committed crimes at random, cold-blooded, heartless thugs, I can tell my colleagues that the victims and their loved ones in all of these cases are all traumatized and distraught and deserving of sympathy and compassion.

So what is the message our great hate crime legislation sends? Apparently, through hate crime legislation, we are simply saying to the world, if you are really going to hurt me, please, please do not hate me. Instead, make it a random, cold-blooded, senseless act of violence. That is what we prefer in this country, according to this bill.
[Emphasis added.]

Monday, April 03, 2006

Canadian Tyranny a Warning to U.S.

Rev. Tristan Emmanuel, of the ECP Centre in Canada ("Equipping Christians for the Public Square"), was the dynamic speaker at our recent MassResistance/Article 8 Alliance banquet.

Describing the tyranny in Canada concerning any opposition to the extremist homosexual agenda, Rev. Emmanuel made it all too clear that we're traveling down that same road in America, with "hate crimes" legislation, laws and regulations protecting any imaginable "sexual orientation" (never defined in law!), etc. What Emmanuel calls "Christophobia" is really an attempt to silence the Christian Gospel, first on issues of homosexuality, then on other moral teachings.

Here's a report from Agape Press by Gail Besse, who attended the banquet. Excerpts:

Christians are being humiliated, intimidated, and stopped from expressing their beliefs in public, Rev. Tristan Emmanuel recently told a gathering concerned about judicial activism and the erosion of free speech in Massachusetts. He outlined the situation in Canada, where same-sex "marriage" is legal and a 2004 law criminalized the criticism of homosexuality as a hate crime. America is headed the same way unless people of faith stop apologizing for their sincerely held beliefs, said Emmanuel...

Emmanuel stressed the danger involved when a legislative body defers to a judicial one ... In Canada, he said, human rights tribunals started out as watchdog groups but became empowered by Parliament with police powers. The tribunals investigate what they consider to be human rights violations, "educate" people with mandatory sensitivity training, then prosecute and judge on grounds of guilty until proven innocent, according to the pastor. One case involved a Toronto printer who refused to print material on lesbianism. The ensuing court battle -- which the printer lost -- lasted nine years and cost the printer $170,000....

Saturday, April 01, 2006

The War on Christians: We're Fighting Back!

We recently attended a great conference in D.C. on the war on Christian values here in the U.S. You know who is behind the assault: the activist judiciary, the ACLU, assorted "progressive" liberal politicians, the abortion lobby, the homosexual lobby, Unitarians and other assorted secular humanists, etc.

The conference was sponsored by Vision America. They've worked with some of the best conservative thinkers in America to draw up their" contract with Congress" to promote an "American Renewal." The ten points [not exact quotes]:

1. Affirm the national relationship with God in our places of worship, schools, mottos, and public spaces.
2. Secure our national interest in the institutions of marriage and family.
3. Secure our fundamental right as parents to the care, custody, and control of our children.
4. Secure our God-gifted right to life [vs. abortion, human cloning, human embryo research].
5. Protect religious freedom [including blocking "hate crime" legislation].
6. Protect property rights.
7. Pass legislation to restrict obscenity and pornography [and against its inclusion as a First Amendment right].
8. Secure just taxes through tax reform.
9. Secure our national borders.
10. Call for judicial restraint and an end to judicial activism.

Read their declaration of principles at ValuesVoter.org. The largest, boldest print in the text is reserved for their call for "Judicial Restraint and and end to Judicial Activism" -- which makes us very happy! And they're developing a website focused on stopping activist judges.