We print this letter (with permission from its author) circulating among pro-lifers in Massachusetts. See our earlier posting on Kerry Healey's appearance as keynote speaker, along with her running mate Reed Hillman, in a Planned Parenthood sponsored pro-abortion party at the end of the state Republican Convention! And we've noted their pro civil unions stance. From a supporter of the Mass. State Constitution Party write-in candidate, Rev. Michael Carl:
Subject: Vote Your Conscience
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
I would like to take the time here and urge you to vote a week from today. But I am not asking you to vote Democratic or Republican. I am asking you to vote your conscience.
I don't know about you, but I have been greatly dissatisfied with this year's crop of gubernatorial candidates. For years I have voted straight down the GOP ticket, but conscience tells me this year I just can't do it. The Massachusetts State Republican Party has nominated a woman who is pro-abortion, pro-embryonic stem cell research, pro-civil unions and pro legalized gambling. I cannot in good conscience cast my vote for such a candidate, not any more.
The argument in favour of voting for the GOP candidate basically boils down to the lesser of two evils idea. Because Kerry Healey is more conservative than anyone else on the ballot, a win for her would make things not as bad as they could potentially be should another candidate win. May I remind everyone that a lesser of two evils is still evil? We will never get what we want if we vote for candidates who oppose our desires and wishes. Simple logic tells us that.
I understand that the real change this state needs does not come from the State House but from God's house. Only the Word of God can change lives for eternity. I am a preacher, not a politician. Yet, as a preacher, how can I continue to preach one message from the pulpit and support an opposing message in the ballot box? My conscience will not allow me to do this any longer. I must earnestly contend for the faith once delivered. It is about time that we as Christians voted as Christians.
I am not calling for a national movement or the setup of another religious political action committee. I am simply urging you to vote for candidates not based on perceived success, but based on conscience. Do the right thing. If we continue to ignore candidates we agree with simply because we don't think they have a chance of winning, they never will have a chance of winning! We don't do what is right because we think it will be successful. We would never promote that idea in our churches, so why promote that idea in the ballot box? In this election, I am supporting the Massachusetts State Constitution Party write-in candidacy of Michael Carl. I would urge you to do the same.
Write in Michael Carl, 109 Eutaw Ave., Lynn, MA 01902 (the address must be written in as well) for governor.
You read more of my endorsement of Mr. Carl by logging on to my blog posting.
Because of Grace,
Kevin Thompson
Asst. Pastor, North Baptist Church
Brockton, MA
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Monday, October 30, 2006
Time to Reread Prof. Hadley Arkes on Romney's Failure to Follow Constitution
TIME TO REREAD Prof. Hadley Arkes' article in National Review, "The Missing Governor" (May 17, 2004):
Arkes is Professor of Jurisprudence at Amherst College. Here are excerpts, with commentary by John Haskins below.
The conservative lawyers argued that new plaintiffs would form a class and seek an injunction from the court to enforce the holding in the Goodridge case. But they seemed to forget that the legislature has the authority to shape and define the power to issue injunctions.
John Haskins comments:
Exceptional conservative honesty! This reveals why we're losing. This is not only 'must reading." It's also must thinking.
All who are troubled by where America is heading MUST read Professor Arkes' NR column -- again if they have read it before. They must send this quote and the link to Arkes' article to anyone who needs to understand not only what is actually, all pretenses aside, an unconditional "pro-family" and conservative surrender of constitutional law, not only in here Massachusetts, but in case after case after case around the country. Vermont, California, New Jersey...
We are not just losing, we are surrendering. Most of our prominent "conservative" attorneys and law professors are not constitutionalists in any meaningful sense. Professor Arkes' article, now two-and-a-half years old, but still as fresh and urgent as the day he wrote it, hints at this. There are piles of irrefutable evidence to support this charge. And it indicts many of what I call "paycheck conservatives" -- including some who are running around soaking up tax-deductible donations and admiration playing the role of pro-family hero.
But many have long histories of endlessly and compulsively trying to find the middle ground and compromising the Constitution itself, while mocking and undermining behind the scenes all attorneys and pro-family leaders who try to hold the line. The result is a gradual collapse of constitutional democracy, parental rights, and the sanctity of childhood and the natural human family. In terms of jurisprudence, many of our "pro-family" lawyers and law professors are on the other side. We could name some of those directly responsible for covering up Mitt Romney's illegal imposition of homosexual marriage. The essential point is to understand that their surrender is at the spiritual and subconscious level. They believe themselves to be "pro-family", pro-constitution heroes. Their results over the years and their constant undermining of fundamental constitutional principles prove otherwise.
Professor Arkes, widely respected and head and shoulders above these other lawyers and professors as a constitutional scholar, names no names and understates his description of them in the most gentlemanly way. But read between the lines. This has been and continues to be a step-by-step surrender, negotiated case-by-case by our own "conservative" lawyers, law professors and pro-family leadership.
We can be silent no longer.
Arkes is Professor of Jurisprudence at Amherst College. Here are excerpts, with commentary by John Haskins below.
On what Romney could have done:
…if the constitutional authority was really with the governor, to act for himself and the legislature, then it made the most profound difference that the governor flex that authority now himself: He could invoke his powers under the constitution; cite the error of the court in seizing jurisdiction wrongfully for itself; and order all licenses of marriage to be sent on to Boston, to his office, until the legislature, in the fullness of time, settled its policy on marriage…. But this argument over the error of the court, or the wrongful taking of jurisdiction, does not expire on May 17. That argument is still open, which means that it could be plausible for the governor to make that move at any time. But why should he make that move when receding has now become his signature tune?
The conservative lawyers argued that new plaintiffs would form a class and seek an injunction from the court to enforce the holding in the Goodridge case. But they seemed to forget that the legislature has the authority to shape and define the power to issue injunctions.
John Haskins comments:
Exceptional conservative honesty! This reveals why we're losing. This is not only 'must reading." It's also must thinking.
All who are troubled by where America is heading MUST read Professor Arkes' NR column -- again if they have read it before. They must send this quote and the link to Arkes' article to anyone who needs to understand not only what is actually, all pretenses aside, an unconditional "pro-family" and conservative surrender of constitutional law, not only in here Massachusetts, but in case after case after case around the country. Vermont, California, New Jersey...
We are not just losing, we are surrendering. Most of our prominent "conservative" attorneys and law professors are not constitutionalists in any meaningful sense. Professor Arkes' article, now two-and-a-half years old, but still as fresh and urgent as the day he wrote it, hints at this. There are piles of irrefutable evidence to support this charge. And it indicts many of what I call "paycheck conservatives" -- including some who are running around soaking up tax-deductible donations and admiration playing the role of pro-family hero.
But many have long histories of endlessly and compulsively trying to find the middle ground and compromising the Constitution itself, while mocking and undermining behind the scenes all attorneys and pro-family leaders who try to hold the line. The result is a gradual collapse of constitutional democracy, parental rights, and the sanctity of childhood and the natural human family. In terms of jurisprudence, many of our "pro-family" lawyers and law professors are on the other side. We could name some of those directly responsible for covering up Mitt Romney's illegal imposition of homosexual marriage. The essential point is to understand that their surrender is at the spiritual and subconscious level. They believe themselves to be "pro-family", pro-constitution heroes. Their results over the years and their constant undermining of fundamental constitutional principles prove otherwise.
Professor Arkes, widely respected and head and shoulders above these other lawyers and professors as a constitutional scholar, names no names and understates his description of them in the most gentlemanly way. But read between the lines. This has been and continues to be a step-by-step surrender, negotiated case-by-case by our own "conservative" lawyers, law professors and pro-family leadership.
We can be silent no longer.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Dangers of Undefined Term "Sexual Orientation"
We've said before that the lack of definition for the term "sexual orientation" leads us to dangerous places. Now we read in LifeSiteNews about a college course in the "Sexual Diversity Studies Program" at the University Toronoto which explores...
sadomasochism, bondage and domination as part of an “academic” approach to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues.... graduating student Robbie Morgan [said,] “We’ll talk about whips and chains in a political, social, cultural, religious context of sexuality and how that sexuality affects those institutions." ... "Visiting lecturers will address technical aspects of flogging, restraint, and role-play,” the University’s website course description explains. “Students will ‘research’ questions (e.g. what constitutes coercion? Consent? Control? Submission? Can sexual practices transform our understanding of power?) by the optional performance of selected scenes.”
Sexual “diversity” has become an increasingly central emphasis of the University of Toronto’s social policy over the past decade. In 2003, then-president Robert Birgeneau wrote in the Toronto Star that the University had made “great progress” in ensuring the comfort level of “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered or queer” students.
Here in Massachusetts, we pointed out that the New England Leather Alliance (NELA) -- whose logo is a whip -- was scheduled to march in Boston Pride last June, though our photographer didn't see them in the final line-up. Even leading hotels in Boston, such as the Sheraton and the Park Plaza Hotel, have hosted their BDSM (bondage, domination, sadism, masochism) conventions. That's because they couldn't discriminate on the basis of "sexual orientation," we assume.
The Boston Globe recently reported on their upcoming BDSM convention having to move: "Adult event hits the road in permit flap." So this January, the BDSM Convention will be in Danvers at the Sheraton Ferncroft Resort. In 2005, the Boston Herald thought it was OK to report on their “Fetish Fair” event at the Boston Center for the Arts in 2005: "Leather abounded, of course, but plenty of other kinks were on display: latex, saddles, corsets, paddles, whips, adult diapers, S&M videos and several women and men dressed as women being led around the market in chains.” (8-7-05)
Believe it or not, NELA is a 501(c)3 organization and has given "charitable donations" to "Masters and Slaves Together," the Boston Dyke March, and the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom.
Accept all of this, or you're guilty of unlawful discrimination on the basis of "sexual orientation."
sadomasochism, bondage and domination as part of an “academic” approach to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues.... graduating student Robbie Morgan [said,] “We’ll talk about whips and chains in a political, social, cultural, religious context of sexuality and how that sexuality affects those institutions." ... "Visiting lecturers will address technical aspects of flogging, restraint, and role-play,” the University’s website course description explains. “Students will ‘research’ questions (e.g. what constitutes coercion? Consent? Control? Submission? Can sexual practices transform our understanding of power?) by the optional performance of selected scenes.”
Sexual “diversity” has become an increasingly central emphasis of the University of Toronto’s social policy over the past decade. In 2003, then-president Robert Birgeneau wrote in the Toronto Star that the University had made “great progress” in ensuring the comfort level of “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered or queer” students.
Here in Massachusetts, we pointed out that the New England Leather Alliance (NELA) -- whose logo is a whip -- was scheduled to march in Boston Pride last June, though our photographer didn't see them in the final line-up. Even leading hotels in Boston, such as the Sheraton and the Park Plaza Hotel, have hosted their BDSM (bondage, domination, sadism, masochism) conventions. That's because they couldn't discriminate on the basis of "sexual orientation," we assume.
The Boston Globe recently reported on their upcoming BDSM convention having to move: "Adult event hits the road in permit flap." So this January, the BDSM Convention will be in Danvers at the Sheraton Ferncroft Resort. In 2005, the Boston Herald thought it was OK to report on their “Fetish Fair” event at the Boston Center for the Arts in 2005: "Leather abounded, of course, but plenty of other kinks were on display: latex, saddles, corsets, paddles, whips, adult diapers, S&M videos and several women and men dressed as women being led around the market in chains.” (8-7-05)
Believe it or not, NELA is a 501(c)3 organization and has given "charitable donations" to "Masters and Slaves Together," the Boston Dyke March, and the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom.
Accept all of this, or you're guilty of unlawful discrimination on the basis of "sexual orientation."
Friday, October 27, 2006
Margaret Marshall's Ethical Violations Covered Up by Boston Globe
Chief Justice Margaret Marshall was keynote speaker at the Mass. Lesbian & Gay Bar Association fundraising dinner in 1999,
where she advocated for extension of homosexual "rights."
Back in April 2004, the Boston Globe refused to report MassResistance/Article 8 Alliance's revelation at a State House press conference that Chief Justice Margaret Marshall had uniquely violated the Code of Judicial Conduct in her open advocacy for extension of homosexual "rights," and should be removed from office on that basis alone. Marshall appeared as keynote speaker (not allowed for judges) at the Mass. Lesbian & Gay Bar Association fundraiser in 1999, and later ruled on the same-sex marriage case where she had a clear, publicly expressed bias. A Globe reporter was at our April 2004 press conference, but no story ever ran in the Globe, the Herald, or on the TV stations also present.
But today, the Globe ran an AP story which is much less significant, "Judge defends attendance at '02 lesbian rite" ["lesbian rite"?!], on Sen. Brownback of Kansas blocking a federal judicial nominee's appointment. At issue is the nominee's attendance in 2002 at a "lesbian commitment ceremony" of a friend in Massachusetts.
While we think that Sen. Brownback is right to question how the nominee's attendance at that event "might shape her judicial views," we also know the Globe's intention is to discredit Brownback. But clearly, Marshall's unquestionable ethics violation was, and still is, a bigger story. It's never too late for the Globe to address this issue.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
What's a Parent To Do? Exit the Public Schools?
John Haskins comments on this piece in WorldNetDaily,
"Baptist 'exit strategy' means get kids out of public schools; Groundswell of support building in 16 million member group for homeschooling" (10-20-06) :
It is one of the most tragic and far-reaching failures of the Family Research Council/Alliance Defense Fund/Massachusetts Family Institute - type "conservatism" in America that they have totally failed to acknowledge the desperate need to pressure politicians intensely for a fundamental change in our education system so that "vouchers" or somesuch thing will allow all parents to find the private (or public) school that best suits their own children.
On issue after issue, it takes twenty or thirty years for pro-family leaders to see that we are actually heading where groups like MassResistance are telling them we are heading. There are many who have concluded that the pro-family leaders at the state and national level, in their blind addiction to moderate, non-controversial "solutions," have waited too long and it is simply too late to save America for our children.
I am of the firm opinion that we must roughly push aside those "pro-family leaders" who have lured us down the path of surrender with false assurances and have played on our deep desire to see things as less dangerous than they are. The only alternative will be continued acquiescence to the tightening fist of tyranny. I understand that most pro-family people sitting at home watching the boob tube are not yet ready to open their eyes and see where this is leading. But more and more people seem to be getting angry as they realize what kind of people have been responsible for the total strategic incompetence of the pro-family and conservative leadership.
It is a major, long-term success -- partly due to the work of the the former Parents' Rights Coalition (now MassResistance) -- that the Southern Baptists and many others are finally understanding that schools are intent on destroying the moral character of our children. But they and other "pro-family conservatives" have wasted precious years debating this issue and trusting in George Bush, political "messiah for hire," and his party.
MassResistance comments on the idea of "exiting" the public schools:
We're very frustrated by the call to home school. Been there, done that. It's not the solution for most people. Kids are miserable, mother is not as happy as she pretends, etc. We suspect most of the articles pushing home schooling are written by the fathers who aren't stuck in the home, doing the "schooling"!
And why do people with traditional values have to be punished by this level of sacrifice (and we're speaking just as much of the hardship on the children as the parents!). We pay taxes too, and we deserve schooling benefits. Why throw in the towel and let the leftists totally control government-funded education? Why give them that victory?
We believe that new private schools -- whether religious or secular -- are the answer, and vouchers play an important role in making these happen. Sadly, we're almost all trapped in the public schools for the time being, but need to be working for the next generation's children: the little ones, born or not yet born; neighbors, great-nephews, granddaughters ...
"Baptist 'exit strategy' means get kids out of public schools; Groundswell of support building in 16 million member group for homeschooling" (10-20-06) :
It is one of the most tragic and far-reaching failures of the Family Research Council/Alliance Defense Fund/Massachusetts Family Institute - type "conservatism" in America that they have totally failed to acknowledge the desperate need to pressure politicians intensely for a fundamental change in our education system so that "vouchers" or somesuch thing will allow all parents to find the private (or public) school that best suits their own children.
On issue after issue, it takes twenty or thirty years for pro-family leaders to see that we are actually heading where groups like MassResistance are telling them we are heading. There are many who have concluded that the pro-family leaders at the state and national level, in their blind addiction to moderate, non-controversial "solutions," have waited too long and it is simply too late to save America for our children.
I am of the firm opinion that we must roughly push aside those "pro-family leaders" who have lured us down the path of surrender with false assurances and have played on our deep desire to see things as less dangerous than they are. The only alternative will be continued acquiescence to the tightening fist of tyranny. I understand that most pro-family people sitting at home watching the boob tube are not yet ready to open their eyes and see where this is leading. But more and more people seem to be getting angry as they realize what kind of people have been responsible for the total strategic incompetence of the pro-family and conservative leadership.
It is a major, long-term success -- partly due to the work of the the former Parents' Rights Coalition (now MassResistance) -- that the Southern Baptists and many others are finally understanding that schools are intent on destroying the moral character of our children. But they and other "pro-family conservatives" have wasted precious years debating this issue and trusting in George Bush, political "messiah for hire," and his party.
MassResistance comments on the idea of "exiting" the public schools:
We're very frustrated by the call to home school. Been there, done that. It's not the solution for most people. Kids are miserable, mother is not as happy as she pretends, etc. We suspect most of the articles pushing home schooling are written by the fathers who aren't stuck in the home, doing the "schooling"!
And why do people with traditional values have to be punished by this level of sacrifice (and we're speaking just as much of the hardship on the children as the parents!). We pay taxes too, and we deserve schooling benefits. Why throw in the towel and let the leftists totally control government-funded education? Why give them that victory?
We believe that new private schools -- whether religious or secular -- are the answer, and vouchers play an important role in making these happen. Sadly, we're almost all trapped in the public schools for the time being, but need to be working for the next generation's children: the little ones, born or not yet born; neighbors, great-nephews, granddaughters ...
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
New Jersey Marriage Ruling: 180 Days...till WHAT?
TRENTON, N.J. - Oct. 25, 2006 (AP)
New Jersey's Supreme Court opened the door to gay marriage Wednesday, ruling that homosexuals are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but leaving it to lawmakers to legalize same-sex unions. The high court gave lawmakers 180 days to rewrite marriage laws to either include same-sex couples or create a new system of civil unions for them.
Or else ... what ?? Will the justices throw a hissy fit? Or will some weenie governor tell his Dept. of Public Health to print new Party A/Party B/Party C (so they don't have to bother reprinting them in a few years) marriage licenses? The old "180 days trick" worked in Massachusetts; maybe it will work in New Jersey.
Garden State Equality, New Jersey's main gay and lesbian political organization quickly announced Wednesday that three lawmakers would introduce a bill in the Legislature to get full marriage rights to same-sex couples.
Apparently, New Jersey homosexual activists are openly admitting they need to get a bill passed by the legislature. In Massachusetts, that still hasn't happened, though there were bills filed this past session which were not acted on (H977/S967). So, as we've been pointing out for over two years, same-sex "marriage" is still not legal in Massachusetts. And the GLBT leadership is hoping no one will notice.
New Jersey's Supreme Court opened the door to gay marriage Wednesday, ruling that homosexuals are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but leaving it to lawmakers to legalize same-sex unions. The high court gave lawmakers 180 days to rewrite marriage laws to either include same-sex couples or create a new system of civil unions for them.
Or else ... what ?? Will the justices throw a hissy fit? Or will some weenie governor tell his Dept. of Public Health to print new Party A/Party B/Party C (so they don't have to bother reprinting them in a few years) marriage licenses? The old "180 days trick" worked in Massachusetts; maybe it will work in New Jersey.
Garden State Equality, New Jersey's main gay and lesbian political organization quickly announced Wednesday that three lawmakers would introduce a bill in the Legislature to get full marriage rights to same-sex couples.
Apparently, New Jersey homosexual activists are openly admitting they need to get a bill passed by the legislature. In Massachusetts, that still hasn't happened, though there were bills filed this past session which were not acted on (H977/S967). So, as we've been pointing out for over two years, same-sex "marriage" is still not legal in Massachusetts. And the GLBT leadership is hoping no one will notice.
TransWorcester
This weekend, Oct. 27-29, Worcester’s DCU Center "will host a gathering of transsexuals, bisexuals, genderqueers, intersexuals, polysexuals, transgenders and others for the fifth Transcending Boundaries conference." Their website says, "We'll take over DCU Center to foster community, educate ourselves, and overcome societal sex, gender, and sexuality boundaries!" Also participating in the conference is PFLAG, which along with GLSEN and Planned Parenthood, has hopped on the trans bandwagon and is actively pushing all things trans in the public square and public schools. Sponsors include the YWCA of Central Mass. the Worcester Hilton Garden Hotel, AIDS Project Worcester, and Planned Parenthood of Connecticut (the group that gave the "trans" workshop at the GLSEN Boston conference last year).
PFLAG is "Parents, Friends, Families of Lesbians and Gays" ... and Bisexuals and Transgenders and genderqueers and intersexuals and polysexuals and ... Someone pointed out that these are really parents and families who are wondering where they went wrong, but burying their unease, sorrow, and/or guilt by "celebrating diversity".
Everywhere we go we're having "trans" madness forced on us. Men dressed as women invading women's restrooms. That absurd movie Transamerica. (No, we have no plans to see it.) The transgender "anti-bullying curriculum" about to go into all our middle schools. Little children coming to school dressed as the opposite sex. Workers "transitioning" on the job -- even teachers at schools, with no opt-out for their young students. The pro-GLBT "Human Rights Campaign" giving its 100% rating only to companies that offer "health" benefits to "transitioning" employees.
Once you allow homosexuality and bisexuality to go mainstream, how can you not allow transsexuality? If there's no "normal" any more, who's to object? One strategy seems to be to de-sensitize people to transgenderism/transsexuality, so "straightforward" homosexuality will seem downright tame. Of course, this will be considered transphobic hate speech in just a few years -- but for now, we can still ask: What on earth is the Worcester DCU Center thinking? (Ask them: 508-755-6800.)
Bay Windows has been hyping this event for some time now:
"She’s all here" (Bay Windows, 10-19-06):
Don’t fit into the mainstream LGBT mold? Not to worry. Later this month, from Oct. 27-29, Worcester’s DCU Center will host a gathering of transsexuals, bisexuals, genderqueers, intersexuals, polysexuals, transgenders and others for the fifth Transcending Boundaries conference. The event is geared toward bringing together people who are often considered on the margins of the LGBT community. The event will feature workshops, speakers and entertainment, including a Halloween party, and in a first for the event, the conference has merged with the Northeast regional conference for Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).
PFLAG is "Parents, Friends, Families of Lesbians and Gays" ... and Bisexuals and Transgenders and genderqueers and intersexuals and polysexuals and ... Someone pointed out that these are really parents and families who are wondering where they went wrong, but burying their unease, sorrow, and/or guilt by "celebrating diversity".
Everywhere we go we're having "trans" madness forced on us. Men dressed as women invading women's restrooms. That absurd movie Transamerica. (No, we have no plans to see it.) The transgender "anti-bullying curriculum" about to go into all our middle schools. Little children coming to school dressed as the opposite sex. Workers "transitioning" on the job -- even teachers at schools, with no opt-out for their young students. The pro-GLBT "Human Rights Campaign" giving its 100% rating only to companies that offer "health" benefits to "transitioning" employees.
Once you allow homosexuality and bisexuality to go mainstream, how can you not allow transsexuality? If there's no "normal" any more, who's to object? One strategy seems to be to de-sensitize people to transgenderism/transsexuality, so "straightforward" homosexuality will seem downright tame. Of course, this will be considered transphobic hate speech in just a few years -- but for now, we can still ask: What on earth is the Worcester DCU Center thinking? (Ask them: 508-755-6800.)
Bay Windows has been hyping this event for some time now:
"She’s all here" (Bay Windows, 10-19-06):
Don’t fit into the mainstream LGBT mold? Not to worry. Later this month, from Oct. 27-29, Worcester’s DCU Center will host a gathering of transsexuals, bisexuals, genderqueers, intersexuals, polysexuals, transgenders and others for the fifth Transcending Boundaries conference. The event is geared toward bringing together people who are often considered on the margins of the LGBT community. The event will feature workshops, speakers and entertainment, including a Halloween party, and in a first for the event, the conference has merged with the Northeast regional conference for Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)