Posted on 07/04/2004 12:01:46 PM PDT by mrustow
May 17 was, in the words of Ron Crews of the Massachusetts Family Institute, “a day of mourning.” For on that day, Massachusetts officials began marrying man to man, and woman to woman. Those who brought about this state of affairs claim to believe in “equality” and to be “democrats,” but in fact are elites who will have nothing of equality, let alone democracy. Five elite groups brought about same-sex marriage, which is however not an unalterable condition: Activist judges, the establishment media, ultraliberal elected officials, gay activist organizations and the homosexual activist, “shadow government.”
In the Supreme Court’s June 26, 2003 “Lawrence” decision overturning the Texas sodomy law, it went beyond the claims of “privacy” that homosexual activists had always previously made, with some justices already leaning in their decisions towards same-sex marriage. In a game of judicial “can you top this,” on November 18 in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, led by Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court projected a non-existent right to same-sex marriage onto the 200-year-old, Massachusetts State Constitution. And beginning on February 12, when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered city officials, in clear violation of California state law, to illegally marry people of the same sex, for weeks, California state judges found every specious excuse imaginable (including “punctuation”) to refuse doing their jobs.
According to its own archive, in the past year the New York Times has published 305 articles on same-sex marriage, virtually all of them with a one-sided, pro-same-sex marriage slant. The Times and the rest of the elite, establishment media hammer away, claiming that homosexuals are in the same situation that blacks were during the civil rights movement, and that to deny homosexuals the right to marry members of the same sex, would be to treat them as second-class citizens. As Sen. Rick Santorum observed prior to Lawrence, the same argument would justify incestuous and multispousal marriages. The elite, politically correct media have, however, “won” the argument via their usual method -- by variously silencing, caricaturing, and demonizing their opponents. And through threats: A house editorial in the March 11 New York Times made a veiled threat to politically destroy Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg, if he did not commence performing illegal same-sex weddings, and direct city officials to do the same.
Beginning in February, rogue political leaders, most notoriously San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and New Paltz, NY Mayor Jason West, demagogued the issue, spitting on their respective state laws, while wrapping themselves in imaginary flags of “equality,” illegally marrying same-sex couples. As professor of law Vikram David Amar of the University of California’s Hastings College of Law in San Francisco pointed out, Mayor Newsom violated no less than three provisions of California State law, as well as the California state constitution’s ban on officials refusing to uphold laws with which they disagree. “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, section 308.5 of the Family Law Code -- which was enacted by the voters themselves as an initiative (Proposition 22) in the 2000 election -- says that ‘only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.’"
Homosexual activist groups have been among the most influential players in the same-sex marriage campaign. Working behind the scenes with political leaders, news editors, public and private managers and educators, these groups have for the past thirty years wielded increasing power over what Americans may see and hear and say and do. Often at taxpayer expense, they have imposed a situation in which gays and their agenda must always be depicted in a positive manner, and their critics demonized. Some activist groups have increasingly hijacked public institutions, which they use for gay political organizing, same-sex marriage politicking, and most importantly, sexual recruitment.
One such powerful activist group, GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, pronounced “glisten”) has developed a curriculum promoting same-sex marriage to schoolchildren. One of the lesson plans instructs educators, “Elicit laws or customs that students feel are reflective of current marriage practice and … the underlying attitudes/beliefs. These practices reflect the ideas that marriage requires compatibility, economic interdependence, and that marriage is first and foremost about love – not procreation.”
But promoting same-sex marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for GLSEN, which functions in the schools through homosexual teacher-activists. The group, which was founded in 1990 by Kevin Jennings, was originally named GLISTN, as in the “Gay and Lesbian Independent School Teachers Network.”
GLSEN Los Angeles sells a homosexualist curriculum that starts in kindergarten, “cootie shots” (which as a traveling “play” has also reached tens of thousands of young school children), whereby it seeks to impose homosexuality on all subjects.
In “Play Wedding,” designed for K-2, “Two little girls play dolls and talk about a wedding between two men one of them attended.” In “La Peluca de Su Mama,” which is also promoted for K-2 pupils, “A Latino boy is mocked and teased by his classmates for trying on his mother’s wig.” In “Billy Tipton,” for grades 3-6, “Billy, a jazz musician and heartthrob, who lived her/his entire life as a man, shares his/her story.” In three other lessons, little boys are encouraged variously to wear dresses, don their mother’s high heels, and paint their fingernails bright orange.
GLSEN activist and “Cootie Shots” co-editor and theater director Norma Bowles claims, “We started hearing from parents and teachers that something like this was needed for elementary schools. As young as first and second grade, kids are calling each other names like sissy and queerboy. Long before kids even know what it means, the put down of the day is ‘That’s so gay.’”
First and second graders speaking that way? Parents calling for a pro-gay curriculum? I don’t think so. In fact, in 2002 parents in Novato, CA sued to protect their children from being exposed to “Cootie Shots.”
According to World Net Daily reporter Diana Lynne, Fringe Benefits Theatre’s Web site has said that it is "dedicated to building bridges between gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) youth and their straight peers, teachers and parents." However, in news reports, the group sells its productions as simply “promoting diversity.” And the group has since made it impossible to reach it directly. Now, although Fringe Benefits is supported by taxpayer dollars, one must use intermediaries such as the radical leftwing Southern Poverty Law Center's Web site to reach the group.
GLSEN activists have preyed on sexually confused (which many adolescents are) children as young as 12, and have told 14-year-olds that the latter are “transgenders,” an incoherent notion that claims that one can have a sexual identity that contradicts one’s body. The “therapy” for such confused souls involves chopping off a child’s sexual organs, constructing useless facsimiles of the sex organs of the opposite sex, and counseling the mutilated child that he (it?) is what he is not.
GLSEN’s most powerful organizing tool has been “Gay-Straight Alliances” that homosexual activist-teachers organize and manipulate at their schools. GSAs operate under the ruse that children as young as 12 have not only full-blown sexual identities, but a political consciousness of conflicts involving sex and sexual orientation.
Homosexual activist groups have parlayed their power into the creation of a fifth group, which I call the homosexual “shadow government.” Thus do some states and municipalities have homosexual activist advocacy institutionalized as part of government -- "Commissions for Gay and Lesbian Youth," “Commissions on Sexual Minorities,” etc.
In Massachusetts, in what has become known as “fistgate,” thanks to the dissident Web site MassNews, state education officials have joined with activists to push homosexual practices on school children. Two parents, Brian Camenker and Scott Whiteman, publicized a March 25, 2000 talk by state education and health officials, at a GLSEN-sponsored conference, who graphically described and praised any number of homosexual sex acts, most notoriously “fisting” (forcing one’s fist and in some cases, forearm into another person’s rectum or vagina), and who downplayed the need for safe sex (forget about chastity), before an audience of children and educators. The officials had indoctrinated children as young as 12 to talk about homosexual acts. A 12-year-old girl said of homosexuality, “Don’t knock it, til you’ve tried it,” “How do you know you don’t like it?,” and that it “has a glorious history.”
One homosexual teacher-presenter had her seventh-grade students prepare a film to convince administrators that homosexuality was normal, and “not about sex.”
When Camenker and Whiteman played their tape on a local radio show, the education officials, Julie Netherland and Margot E. Abels, were fired. Netherland sued Camenker and Whiteman, arguing that they had violated her “privacy.” Note that while the taxpayer-sponsored talk took place at Tufts University, the officials said that its content was identical to what they typically taught in the public schools.
As the Seattle-based group, Parents and Teachers for Responsible Schools (PTRS) reports, “The City of Seattle and the Seattle School District have created departments, paid for with public money and staffed by public employees, to advocate for homosexual civil rights, which include the right to marry, adopt, conceive children through artificial insemination, and to receive legal status equivalent to that afforded race under law. These departments, the Seattle Commission on Sexual Minorities (‘SCSM’), and the District's Sexual Minority Advocacy Council (‘SMAC’) are part of their respective Office of Civil Rights.
PTRS reports that homosexual activists first used “AIDS education” as their Trojan horse, to get a foothold in the public schools. Since then, GLSEN has fabricated problems, including abuse and discrimination, encountered by allegedly homosexual children, as a pretext to spread its publicly-funded “safe schools” program across the nation. “Safe schools” is a second Trojan horse, which GLSEN uses to push homosexuality and same-sex marriage on school children at ever younger ages.
Homosexual activists have also used programs funded for gay “suicide prevention” to promote homosexuality and same-sex marriage. In short, all public funding for homosexual-oriented programs is used to promote homosexual sex and same-sex marriage.
It is hardly coincidental that same-sex “marriages” were performed in Massachusetts, beginning on May 17, the fiftieth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Brown v. Topeka Board of Education ruling, in which the justices rode roughshod over the U.S. Constitution, state constitutions and referenda, and the Court’s own precedents, thereby establishing the tyranny that ever since has marched over the will of the American people and its laws with jackboots.
Same-Sex Marriage Zing!
The Southern Poverty Law Center is part of this? That doesn't make sense. Somebody please explain, what does promoting gay marriage have to do with helping the poor with their legal problems?
I can't. That's one of those deep, dark mysteries of the universe, like what the SPLC has to do with helping the poor with their legal problems.
Incoming!
Heads up!
It is very difficult to get anyone to listen. Who could be against "safe schools"? Who could be against "anti-bullying"? They are masters of deceit.
Thanks for the ping.
NO surprise here at all. When it comes to the left/gay lobby's greatest victories they are almost always due to some sort of semantic deception or judicial activism. It is the only way they can win right now, but after years of this idea that the gay lifestyle is of equal civic or moral worth being hammered into the public's consciousness who knows what the public will think. Maybe by then they might not even need to rely on judges or bureaucracy to get their way. By then the majority of Americans may actually agree with them, especially in all the post-Christian states like Massachusetts. I fear that only the South and Rocky Mtn West may prove to be immune to this type of brainwashing and propoganda, but of course that won't matter once the Supreme Court decides to be a council of Kings once again.
bmp
Zing!
Gay Marriage <> Marriage.
Sure thing.
For what it's worth (in the face of the judicial and media outlaw classes), I doubt the public will ever support this stuff. The vast majority of adults are parents, and very few of them are going to be happy to hear Johnny come home, telling them of the joys of fisting, or of boys wearing their mother's dress to school. That, I submit (hope?), is an absolute boundary.
FYI
Heads up!
Incoming!
Zing!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.