Posted on 02/07/2003 4:24:38 AM PST by kattracks
CNSNews.com) - Lawyers from a homosexual advocacy group took depositions from a Massachusetts parent this week, almost three years after he first exposed "Fistgate," a state-sponsored workshop in which educators instructed teens in graphic homosexual sex.
The deposition of Brian Camenker, taken Tuesday by lawyers for the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, is an effort to put parents under financial strain and to discourage others around the country from bringing similar workshops to light, Camenker charged.
"If they are able to be able to beat us in Massachusetts, they can continue to hound any parent who gets in their way," said Camenker, president of the Parents Rights Coalition.
Two Massachusetts Department of Education staffers lost their jobs because of their involvement in the state-funded workshop held at Tufts University in March 2000, called "What They Don't Tell You About Queer Sex and Sexuality in Health Class." The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network co-sponsored the workshop.
Homosexual advocacy groups have been pursuing lawsuits against Camenker and Scott Whiteman, another parent, for secretly recording, exposing and publicizing the event, in which instructors encouraged children as young as 14 years of age to engage in life-threatening sex acts. One instructor told the students: "Fisting often gets a bad rap."
"Fistgate" soon attracted national prominence. Among others, Sean Hannity discusses the event in his book, Let Freedom Ring, and William Bennett talks about the event in his book, The Broken Hearth . This past week, Alan Keyes made a trip to Boston to speak on behalf of Camenker and Whiteman, as well as rally support for their cause.
Legal defense costs since homosexual advocacy groups first deposed Camenker and Whiteman in the summer of 2000 have reached well over $100,000, Camenker said.
"It has a certain national significance as to what the gays can do to parents who expose the stuff," he added.
The Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders did not return calls for comment.
E-mail a news tip to Lawrence Morahan.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
The discovery process is available and Camenker and his attorney are entitled to conduct a pre-trial investigation. This information should be available from GLSEN and the DOE by serving subpoenas on those agencies.
I haven't talked about this particular issue but I've certainly encountered the same kind of disbelief/apathy/ostrichitis to many other issues. Most people look at you like you're crazy when you tell them of things going on in our schools today.
MM
The actual level of direct involvement and encouragement by adult members of GLSEN in creating and operating GSA's in the public schools is unclear and warrants further investigation. Certainly, as we have seen in this thread, GLSEN did manage the DOE "Safe Schools" program, which means they were in charge of taxpayer-funded grants that were used for the purpose of creating new GSA's. That means many new GSA's were created at taxpayer expense. And announcements of the "PRIVATE" GLSEN conference were most likely routed through these PUBLIC school GSA's.
"only a tiny percentage of students have ever attended a conference,..."
Do you have student attendance figures for GLSEN conferences for the past 12 years?
"and the recommended reading list is just that... a recommendation."
The books on the recommended reading lists contain material that is just as obscene and harmful to minors as the material presented at the GLSEN conference, as documented in the thread GLSEN Encourages Teens In Anal SEX "Don't give up".
"There's a lot of truth in that little "satire" you posted in reply 210: (UN(snip)ed: DA: (laughing) Yes, yes… I’m sure you were. But I’m sorry… without an identifiable victim, I can’t possibly prove that they were in any way “harmed.”). Parents were never required to sign permission slips for specific workshops and GLSEN didn't keep track of the ages of the kids going to sexually explicit workshops. Ah, the method in GLSEN's madness."
"I've made it clear that I have no idea whether or not the presenters checked ages, and I don't think it's at all relevent."
Kids, possibly as young as 12 years old, walked right in to an extremely explicit workshop on homosexual sex and checking ages isn't relevant?
You are the one who stated that GLSEN didn't know the ages (or names) of the students in the workshop, and implied "without an identifiable victim, there was "no harm, no foul.” In reply 216 you wrote:
"I can clearly see why the DA would NOT bring charges against an educational effort… ESPECIALLY when no victims can be identified."
So then - no ages, no names, no victims. No victims, no harm, no foul. Is that what you're saying?
"In reply 104, you wrote: "We KNOW that no charges have been filed against GLSEN, therefore the complaint was without merit." [...] Actually madg, there have been no charges filed yet. The fact is, the Attorney General has not rendered any opinion on the complaint filed by Scott Whiteman. Until such time that the complaint is officially dismissed, the workshop presenters could still be charged. Quite frankly, if I were the attorney for Camenker and Whiteman, I'd demand that the AG stop sitting on his hands and make a ruling.
"You're grabbing at straws."
Has the DA responded in any way to the complaint? Or has it simply been ignored for political reasons?
"And, as I pointed out in reply 136, Camenker and Whiteman have NEVER been charged of any crime in a criminal court. The homsexual activist group (Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders) who brought the civil suit used a little-known wiretapping law originally written for organized crime and twisted its meaning to accuse Camenker and Whiteman of committing crimes."
"Twisted its meaning?!" Don't be ridiculous. The law is intended to protect the privacy of the people of Massachusetts. Camenker and Whiteman clearly violated the statute, and their victims are clearly entitled to pursue this remedy..."
Well, let's look again at what GLAD had to say ( from reply 136 ):
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders - GLAD Cases
(scroll down to near bottom of the page)
"Netherland et al. v. Whiteman et al. (Massachusetts)
CASE PENDING
GLAD is putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people. In violation of Massachusetts wiretapping and privacy laws, Scott Whiteman, Brian Camenker, and the right-wing organization Parents Rights Coalition publicly distributed a tape recording of a sexuality and HIV/AIDS prevention education workshop conducted in March, 2000 at a conference sponsored by GLSEN. GLAD filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court on behalf of Julie Netherland, a former employee of the Department of Education, and obtained a temporary restraining order (later converted to a preliminary injunction) to stop the defendants from further distributing the tape recording. After a lengthy discovery period, GLAD filed a motion for summary judgment, which is now pending."
Seems that GLAD's primary focus is anywhere but violation of privacy. Nooooo, this isn't about privacy. This is all about "putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people" (that would include "fisting," correct?) and stopping the defendants from further distributing the tape recording.
"Whether her actions were criminal or not will be decided when the AG acts on Scott Whiteman's complaint. To date, the complaint has not been dismissed. And the Commissioner of Education stated that she violated DOE policy, as pointed out in reply 249 above."
"HAH! More straws. If the DA was going to bring charges it would have done by now."
And what is the statute of limitations on the crime of disseminating material obscene and harmful to minors ( M.G.L. 272, sections 28 and 29 )? If it were me, I'd demand that the DA make a detailed ruling in writing - either the DA officially dismisses the complaint or takes action. If the complaint were dismissed, I would demand a detailed explanation as to why it was dismissed. If I didn't receive a written reply within 10 days, I would resubmit my request every 10 days until the DA responds. The DA has a duty to respond to the complaint. To date, I have been unable to find any public response from the DA to Scott Whiteman's complaint.
"Now that's very interesting! GLSEN received taxpayer money to manage a Massachusetts DOE program that receives taxpayer-funded grants to create GSA's, as documented in reply 115. Students GLSEN makes it happen... [...] A private homosexual advocacy group should not be managing public school programs of any kind. And getting paid with taxpayer money on top of it..."
"That's an interesting opinion... and completely irrelevent. The conference was a private affair that used no taxpayer funds."
It's more than an opinion, it's a statement of fact. You told us that GLSEN received taxpayer money to manage the safe school's program for the state of Massachusetts. The DOE's safe schools program, managed by GLSEN, doled out taxpayer funded grants for the creation of new GSA's -a fact clearly documented in reply 115. The creation of new GSA's is part of GLSEN's mission in the public schools. Notice any conflict of interst? Again, a private homosexual advocacy group should not be managing public school programs of any kind. And they definitely shouldn't be redirecting taxpayer money to programs that are part of their mission.
You've stated that you're not privy to GLSEN finances so you cannot say, with 100 percent certainty, that the conference used absolutely no taxpayer funds. Unless you are a GLSEN financial official, you have no way of knowing whether taxpayer funds were covertly used to support GLSEN's conference or not.
And BTW, it's not irrelevant. It's now become unclear whether any taxpayer funds were used for this conference or not. If GLSEN did, in fact, use any taxpayer funds for this conference, then the claim that it was a private conference becomes suspect. How many kids were brought to the conference on public school buses? That certainly would have been a use of resources paid for by taxpayer monies.
Throw in a wad of taxpayer money and GLSEN "management" and "coordination," and watch GLSEN programs "snowball" in public schools throughout the nation. With full support from the state, of course...
"You were referring to Driscoll's comments AFTER the contrived controversy."
I was referring to the comments Driscoll made after he listened to the evidence on the tape. He was correct when he stated "the workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational".
"It's apparent that Driscoll wrote a letter of introduction as a professional courtesy. Furthermore, the letter was part of the materials that were handed out when the attendees showed up at the conference,..."
It's obvious that GLSEN solicited the letter specifically for their conference materials. Do you know for a fact that conference brochures were not available before the conference? Conference brochures are often available before a conference takes place.
"Secondly, Driscoll was responding to Camenkers lie."
Camenker didn't lie. As we have heard on the Fistgate tape, the presenters' discussions with the children "were of prurient nature, and not educational." Driscoll was responding to the what he heard on the tape - the obscene and harmful material being presented to minors in the workshop. Based on what he heard, Driscoll, in his expert opinion, confirmed that the content of the workshops "were of prurient nature, and not educational."
" It was a PRIVATE conference. Driscoll is commissioner of PUBLIC schools."
And he had a "welcome" letter in the conference brochure - so I ask again, WHY did the GLSEN conference organizers solicit a letter of welcome and support from a PUBLIC school official for a supposedly PRIVATE conference? It doesn't matter where it took place, the children from public schools, some possibly as young as 12, were exposed obscene and harmful matter in the workshop.
" What took place at the PRIVATE conferece would have never taken place at PUBLIC schools,"
Actually one of the workshop presenters let us in on the little secret of how material similar in content to what was presented in the workshop is covered in public school curriculums. As I pointed out in reply 257, workshop presenters who teach classes in the public schools bring in representatives from homosexual groups such as "SpeakOut" as "guest speakers." These "guest speakers" are then permitted to discuss any and all homosexual-related topics with children in the public schools. And sometimes, the "guest speakers" present information in a manner that is even more explicit than was presented in the workshop.
You can listen to it for yourself - From time index 5:39 to 7:41 on Fistgate audio clip 8. Scott Whiteman: As With Vegetables, Children Shouldn't Knock Homosexuality Until They Have Tried It (Length 8:02). The representative "SpeakOut" states: "I'm that speaker who was at the middle school." He admits the discussion took place IN a public MIDDLE SCHOOL!
As I stated in reply 103, Camenker and Whiteman had a civic duty to expose the harmful and obscene material being presented in GLSEN's workshops. Remember, after the conference, the organizers denied claims of misconduct made by the Parent's Rights Coalition. The audio tape substantiated Camenker's and Whiteman's claims.
"so what Driscoll thinks of it is irrelevent."
It is relevant because Driscoll, as Commissioner of Education, is ultimately responsible for what is taught to public school children by state employees.
"Until Camenker can produce a bill from GLSEN to the DOE earmarked "for conference expenses," this remains an unsubstantiated claim..."
If GLSEN were permitted free use of facilities, there'd be no bill.
"First of all, who cares what some WND reporter says."
WND asked some hard questions of the Commissioner of Education (unlike the one-sided, homosexual activist web site "Context Matters") and received some frank answers.
As quoted in State condemns 'gay' sex discussion:
"Faced with the irrefutable evidence of his employees' actions, David Driscoll, commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Education, admitted Tuesday: "The participation of our staff in conversations with students about explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention was wrong. The workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational, and what we heard suggests that the discussion contributed absolutely nothing to the students' understanding of how to avoid AIDS and HIV." "
"Anecdotes are not documentation. Let's take a look at your link:"
The anecdotes in this case support the documentation. Instead of simply looking at the link, why don't you listen to what the conferences presenters actually told the children:
"On March 25, 2000 the Massachusetts Departments of Education and Health teamed up with the national gay and lesbian group GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) and conducted a conference for school children and educators. The conference was held under the guise of tolerance and safe schools. However, as the Parent's Rights Coalition discovered, this conference was about teaching children the unsafe mechanics of homosexuality. Following the conference, organizers denied claims of misconduct made by the Parent's Rights Coalition. Organizers were forced to concede the truth after the Parent's Rights Coalition made public an audio recording from the conference, which substantiated their claims..."
"There are hundreds of people at this function. Security is always present at large functions. That's their job."
Was security present for every GLSEN conference, or just the ones following the 2000 "Fistgate" conference?
Because he knows that in many cases opt-OUT doesn't work. For example:
Lessons on homosexuality taking hold in U.S. schools
"... Kindergartners are learning about "homophobia" as lessons about alternative lifestyles and homosexuality appear in America's elementary schools -- often without parental knowledge....
"I'm not a nut, I'm not a foaming religious right-winger or a fanatical bigot," Mrs. Hoffman says. "What I am is pro-parent and pro-family. I'm for my children. "Schools make the kids think about sex," she says. "When my daughter was 10, we opted her out of a sex education class and they put her in anyway."...."
Centennial apologizes for allowing gay speakers
""GRESHAM -- Centennial High School officials apologized Friday for not allowing students to leave classes featuring gay and lesbian panelists as part of the school's annual diversity week.
About two dozen parents complained to the school that their children were forced to listen to discussions on homosexuality without first obtaining their permission.
Several speakers from Vanguard Youth Services, a Portland organization that offers programs for sexual minority youth, visited the high school's English, drama and health classes Monday as part of the four-day diversity week.
Students who felt uncomfortable during class said they were not warned about the topics and wouldn't have attended had they known."
Parents who have children in the public schools can protect their children by removing the homosexual advocates' "audience." Use the Hatch Amendment Letter - Parental Consent Form for use in the Public Schools. Let the pro-homos spout their propaganda and perversion to a bunch of empty chairs.
By GLSEN/Boston who receives some funding from the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth and the Massachusetts Department of Education through the Safe Schools Program.
How were the presenters introduced?
Margot E. Ables, Coordinator, HIV/AIDS Program, Massachusetts Department of Education
Julie Netherland, Coordinator, HIV/AIDS Program, Massachusetts Department of Education
Michael Gaucher, Consultant, HIV/AIDS Program, Massachusetts Department of Public Health
Teachers who attended the conference received state development credits for their participation.
"They claim that we are somehow violating their privacy, and they are using very sleazy, lying tactics," says Camenker. He says this included the recruitment of a 17-year-old girl to their cause. "When we deposed her, we asked what had been said that was so personal. She hadn't even heard the tape. It's impossible to tell one kid's voice from another on the tape, and she didn't even know if she was on it."
So if the event was open to the PUBLIC and the accommodation was paid by a publicly funded “organization” and staffed by DoE teachers receiving state development credits and the witnesses can’t be identified on the tape it would seem the holes in this case are big enough to drive a truck through. This is a SLAP suit plain and simple, it’s part of the sleazy tactics used by the pro-sodomy agenda. We have all the usual suspects, a liberal Judge in the pocket of the perversionists, reminiscent of Spitzer and the APA non-science vote. The mantra of everyone, everything and every objectively negative light shed on the homosexual agenda is wrong, discredited, inaccurate…100% of the time; No Exceptions.
And here’s FR’s liberal mad-“gay” defending the indefensible [indoctrination of minors to practice perversion] with his usual sleazy reasoning and justifying. You’re sick madg, you need help and I’ll pray for you. Anyone defending this depravity has MORE than a homosexual pathology; obvious to everyone is your link to pedophilia.
One more time - let's look again at what GLAD has to say ( from reply 136 ):
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders - GLAD Cases
(scroll down to near bottom of the page)
"Netherland et al. v. Whiteman et al. (Massachusetts)
CASE PENDING
GLAD is putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people. In violation of Massachusetts wiretapping and privacy laws, Scott Whiteman, Brian Camenker, and the right-wing organization Parents Rights Coalition publicly distributed a tape recording of a sexuality and HIV/AIDS prevention education workshop conducted in March, 2000 at a conference sponsored by GLSEN. GLAD filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court on behalf of Julie Netherland, a former employee of the Department of Education, and obtained a temporary restraining order (later converted to a preliminary injunction) to stop the defendants from further distributing the tape recording. After a lengthy discovery period, GLAD filed a motion for summary judgment, which is now pending."
Seems that GLAD's primary focus is anywhere but violation of privacy. Nooooo, this isn't about privacy. This is all about "putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people" (that would include "fisting," correct?) and stopping the defendants from further distributing the tape recording.
"Camenker/Whiteman STILL VIOLATED COMMONWEALTH STATUTE!!!"
It will be three years next month and Camenker and Whiteman have NEVER been charged of any crime in a Massachusetts criminal court. If they "broke the law," can you show us when and where they were charged and convicted in a criminal court? What fine was levied by the court? Have they been sentenced in any way?
If this was such an "open-and-shut case" as you claimed in reply 260, why did GLAD require a lengthy discovery period? Why after nearly three years are they just now taking depositions? I'll tell you why - nah I'll let GLAD tell you why:
"GLAD is putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people."
If this were a clear-cut violation of wire tapping laws, there is no need for a a lengthy discovery period. Dragging this out for THREE YEARS is ridiculous, proving that this is NOT as clear-cut as you think.
This is nothing more GLAD running up legal expenses to stick it to the "right-wing organization Parents Rights Coalition" and Brian Camenker, with support from the pro-homo government of Massachusetts. Yeah madg, Camenker is definitely being harrassed.
BTW, the suit brought by GLAD is a CIVIL SUIT
As Clint N. Suhks stated in reply 267:
"This is a SLAP suit plain and simple, it’s part of the sleazy tactics used by the pro-sodomy agenda."
Well said, Clint!
Meanwhile, the DA quakes in fear at the feet of the Massachusetts homosexual community and fails to issue an official ruling on a complaint that minor children have been exposed obscene and harmful material...
Homosexual Activists Solidify Hold on Schools
"...With a three-year grant worth $121,575 from the Vermont Department of Health, Outright targets middle and high school kids. Kathy Hoyt, Vermont Secretary of Administration, proudly asserted that Outright Vermont "developed a training program for public schools that was designed to support diversity and safe schools for Vermont’s gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth."
As in Massachusetts, however, "safety" has begun to bleed into "sex." That’s the serious charge leveled by Nancy Sheltra, a six-term state representative and founder of Vermont’s pro-family organization, Standing Together And Reclaiming the State (STARS). According to documents provided to AFA by STARS, Outright Vermont has gone lightyears beyond the simple purpose espoused by Hoyt.
For example, Outright used taxpayer money to provide "safer sex activities" and "parties" for teens. These events included, according to Outright’s own documents, "demonstrations, guided practice & skill evaluation" for the use of prophylactics, and the distribution of free condoms, lubricants for sexual intercourse between males, "dental dams" for oral sex between lesbians, and latex gloves for mutual masturbation.
The number of such items requested by Outright Vermont for distribution to teens was mind-boggling: 5,000 condoms, 750 dental dams, 750 latex gloves, and 2,000 packets of lubricant.
Outright also spent monies on youth retreats, including the "recruitment of youth participants," which utilized mailing lists and youth-related meetings to stir interest in the gatherings. Kids who expressed an interest in attending were transported - again using state money - to the retreat site, where youth and adult staff again taught kids how to engage in homosexual sex practices. Outright’s own quarterly report said, "All retreat participants practiced and were evaluated on their (prophylactic) barrier use skills and were given a variety of barriers to take home. Participants joined in role plays."..."
It's part of a well planned and well funded strategy that has been used by the homosexual community for years. Homosexual authors Marshall K. Kirk & Erastes Pill wrote in The Overhauling of Straight America:
"The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion...
The way to benumb raw sensitivities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way. Open and frank talk makes the subject seem less furtive, alien, and sinful, more above-board. Constant talk builds the impression that the public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizable segment accepts or even practices homosexuality. Even rancorous debates between opponents and defenders serve the purpose of desensitization so long as “respectable” gays are front and center to make their own pitch...
And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent -- and only later his unsightly derriere! ...
(5) Make the victimizers look bad. At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights -- long after other gay ads have become commonplace -- it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified. (This will be all the more necessary because, by that time, the entrenched enemy will have quadrupled its output of vitriol and disinformation.) ..."
Governor’s Commission Lies Continually About ‘Safety’ and ‘Suicide’
( Homosexuals Recruit Public School Children )
"Safety
A speech by a homosexual activist in 1995 revealed that he had used "safety" to delude Gov. Weld and the state legislature into adopting the homosexual agenda for the schools of Massachusetts. The speech was titled Winning the Culture War and was given by Kevin Jennings, Executive Director of the "Gay and Lesbian and Straight Teachers’ Network," at the "Human Rights Campaign Fund Leadership Conference" on March 5, 1995."If the Radical Right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language ‘promoting homosexuality’ is one example is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are ‘after their kids.’ We must learn from the abortion struggle, where the clever claiming of the term ‘pro-life’ allowed those who opposed abortion on demand to frame the issue to their advantage, to make sure that we do not allow ourselves to be painted into a corner before the debate even begins.
In Massachusetts the effective reframing of this issue was the key to the success of the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. We immediately seized upon the opponent’s calling card safety and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students’ safety by creating a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems, and suicide are common. Titling our report "Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth," we automatically threw our opponents onto the defensive and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling from day one.
Finding the effective frame for your community is the key to victory. It must be linked to universal values that everyone in the community has in common.
In Massachusetts, no one could speak up against our frame and say, ‘Why, yes, I do think students should kill themselves’: this allowed us to set the terms for the debate.
In Massachusetts, we made creating an environment where youth could speak out our number one priority. We know that, confronted with real-live stories of youth who had suffered from homophobia, our opponents would have to attack people who had been victimized once, which put them in a bully position from which it would be hard to emerge looking good. More importantly, we made sure these youth met with elected officials so that, the next time these officials had to vote on something, there would be a specific face and story attached to the issue. We wanted them to have an actual kid in mind when they had to cast their votes. We won the vote in the Senate 33-7 as a result..."
Brian Camenker Discusses Confession of Margot Abels, Fistgate Teacher
Some do try:
"You ask whether you may participate in various activities of the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD). GLAD is a non-profit corporation whose mission "is to vindicate and expand all areas of gay and lesbian civil rights and the rights of persons affected by HIV through litigation, education, and advocacy..."
In your (nonexpert) opinion. The Commissioner of Education (expert opinion), who heard the evidence on the tape, disagrees with you. Since you don't seem to get it, let's repeat it once again:
As quoted in State condemns 'gay' sex discussion:
"Faced with the irrefutable evidence of his employees' actions, David Driscoll, commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Education, admitted Tuesday:
"The participation of our staff in conversations with students about explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention was wrong. The workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational, and what we heard suggests that the discussion contributed absolutely nothing to the students' understanding of how to avoid AIDS and HIV." "
Go back to Reply 19 in this thread and reread Chapter 272, sections 28, 29, and 31. GLSEN and their workshop presenters are guilty of breaking the General Laws of Massachusetts by disseminating harmful and obscene matter to minors as defined in section 31:
"Harmful to minors", matter is harmful to minors if it is obscene or, if taken as a whole, it (1) describes or represents nudity, sexual conduct or sexual excitement, so as to appeal predominantly to the prurient interest of minors; (2) is patently contrary to prevailing standards of adults in the county where the offense was committed as to suitable material for such minors; and (3) lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.
"Obscene", matter is obscene if taken as a whole it (1) appeals to the prurient interest of the average person applying the contemporary standards of the county where the offense was committed; (2) depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; and (3) lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value...
We heard examples of sexual conduct being clearly described to minors by the workshop presenters on the Fistgate Tape, and the Commissioner of Education made it clear that what was being "described" were "explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention" that "were of prurient nature, and not educational."
You argued in reply 59, that "the 'public employees'" (i.e. the workshop presenters) "were not acting in that capacity... they had volunteered their own time." Since that is the case, they should be charged under sections 28 and 29 of Chapter 272 of M.G.L.. As stated in sections 28 and 29:
"It shall also be a defense in any prosecution under this section if the evidence proves that the defendant was a bona fide school, museum or library, or was acting in the course of his employment as an employee of such organization or of a retail outlet affiliated with and serving the educational purpose of such organization."
The Commissioner of Education clearly stated that the workshop presenters were "WRONG," and that the workshops were "NOT EDUCATIONAL." There were minors present ("victims", as you call them) - Driscoll stated that the workshop presenters had wrongful "conversations with students about explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention."
If charged per sections 28 and 29, the workshop presenters have no defense.
I will reply to the remainder of your post later.
Remedy;pram;Grampa Dave;GrandMoM -- FYI
"CONSULTANT, not manager, CONSULTANT. I know that you are trying to create an image of GLSEN as all-powerful, but lying about it is not the way to go. As far as I know they did not "manage" the DOE’s program... they acted as a consultant. The DOE itself was ultimately responsible for the Safe Schools program, and the DOE has no say over GLSEN's private conference."
No, I'm not lying. I'm simply quoting the little fact that you let slip out. And GLSEN doesn't need any help from me with their "image":
To: EdReform
Yes, I realize that public schools and institutions can and do rent space to private groups, and may have done so in this case. However, since the state has a history of supporting GLSEN programs with taxpayer money, I'd like to know if the state has ever waived the rental fee for GLSEN's conferences and meetings as a means of support.
I think that would be a violation of Equal Access rules. I know that GLSEN used to receive a consultant fee for managing the DOE's Safe Schools program, but I'm not aware of any other grants. GLSEN's focus is K-12 so there's no reason for any college to get cozy with them.
Thanks for the link...
You're welcome.
............
Uh huh.....
Homosexual convention targets grade-school kids
"...This year's conference theme, "Ending the Hate Beginning in School," highlights GLSEN's contention that teaching pro-homosexual lessons to young schoolchildren is an appropriate way to combat "homophobia" and "hatred" directed at homosexuals. But critics like Peter LaBarbera of the Americans for Truth Project, who led a pro-family coalition protesting the conference, said GLSEN's elementary school agenda "manipulates the minds of impressionable children"...
Although conference presenters talked about the importance of disseminating only "age-appropriate" material, all participants, including dozens of high school-aged kids, had the opportunity to receive a "Visitor's Companion" that advertised Chicago's homosexual "leather" bars, a sex club and a homosexual bathhouse called "Steamworks," which was advertised as a "24-hour men's gym/sauna."
LaBarbera questioned why GLSEN's organizers -- already bruising over the recent arrest of a Chicago GLSEN leader for soliciting sex with an underage boy (GLSEN expelled the man) -- did not take the "simple step of keeping these gay sex club ads from reaching the teenagers in their care."
"For years, GLSEN has claimed to protect 'at-risk' kids. But they are now helping put young teenage boys at risk by uncritically passing out a gay guide that hawks anonymous sex clubs and 'leather' bars in Chicago," he said. "This fits into a pattern of GLSEN failing to shield its young followers from a homosexual male sexual culture that not only tolerates, but often celebrates promiscuity." (At last year's GLSEN conference in Atlanta, a similar sexually-laden booklet was passed out to attendees.)
GLSEN's mission "to eliminate heterosexism"
When some school officials at least try to take steps to protect kids, GLSEN whines:
School Defends Trip Delay to Avoid Gay Days Festival (FL)
(an excerpt from an article printed in the Des Moines Register posted on the GLSEN web site)
"... School Principal Todd Wolverton said school officials realized one month ago that the Orlando trip for 70 Creston band students would coincide with the annual Gay Days celebration scheduled for May 28 through June 3. The district's travel agent assured school officials the festival was fairly small, Wolverton said...
It was only last week, he said, that school officials realized Gay Days is expected to attract 100,000 or more adults for what organizers call "America's biggest gay and lesbian vacation experience." At that point, school administrators decided to postpone the band's three-day trip to Orlando so that it would begin June 3, the last day of the festival.
"From the school's standpoint, this has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the group of people who will be there," Wolverton said. "It didn't make one bit of difference what the nature of the group was. We did not move this trip because of the fact that it's Gay Days 2002. We moved this trip because of the fact that there would be 100,000-plus adults partying down there in some of the same areas where we were going to have our kids."
Wolverton said he would have made the same decision had there been any other sort of large festival planned for that many adults..."
An excerpt of GLSEN's response posted on their web site:
GLSEN Expresses Concern as Iowa School Postpones Disney Trip Due to "Gay Days"
"The leading national organization working to end anti-gay discrimination and harassment in America’s schools today expressed concern over the decision of Creston High School officials in Creston, Iowa, to postpone a band trip to Orlando that was to coincide with the city’s Gay Days festival. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, said the decision and resulting controversy may further isolate lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students in local schools.
"This decision reinforces harmful stereotypes, and sends a devastating message to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students and their supporters involved in the band program, school and community," stated GLSEN Executive Director Kevin Jennings. "Regardless of motive, the school has sent a message that may lead some to conclude that ‘gay is bad’ - a message with dangerous and unacceptable consequences in school."...."
The school officials explained it clearly -- for the safety of the children, they didn't want any of their students going on any trip that would put the kids in an environment with an extremely large group of partying adults. Yet GLSEN whines about decisions that reinforce harmful stereotypes, and sends devastating messages.
Tell me again how GLSEN is soooo concerned for the well-being of kids.
Homosexual rights group makes inroads in U.S. schools; Parents unaware of GLSEN's work
"Hovering in the shadows of the homosexual-rights movement is a little- known organization that has concentrated on public schools. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network does not appear on many parents' radar, but those who know about GLSEN say the group has been successful. "The only people who know about GLSEN are the ones fighting in hand- to-hand combat with them, or the 20 to 25 percent of Christians who receive mail from groups like Focus on the Family," said Lon Mabon, president of the Oregon Citizens Alliance....
GLSEN advocate Barbara Miner warned attendees that the voucher and private-school movement jeopardizes the gains pro-homosexual groups have made in public schools. The reason: Students who attend private religious schools may not be exposed to homosexual-tolerance materials..."
He said homosexual organizations such as GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network) get a stronghold on school systems by volunteering to educate school officials about the need to pass non-discrimination policies in schools, to train teachers to prevent "anti-gay" name calling and to serve as community resources on sexual-orientation issues.
Once inside the door, activists proclaim myths about homosexuality as fact, encourage homosexual teachers to come out of the closet, and start as many Gay Straight Alliances as possible. These GSAs, billed as student clubs that help kids discuss sexuality issues, are in fact just another avenue for homosexual propaganda, Carpenter said.
He said activists also work to change district policies, sometimes in the name of “safe schools,” to offer specific protection to homosexuals, making it possible for the schools to quell all opposition to the lifestyle.
So what can parents do to keep their children from homosexual influences in school? Plenty, Carpenter said, beginning with talking with your child to make sure he gets information about sexuality from you and does not have to rely on his peers.
In addition, he suggested that parents get involved with what is happening at the school through volunteerism, talking with school leaders, etc., and that they take time to review curriculum or resources being used in class..."
We'll address all the documentation you chose to "snip" later...
The ATTORNEY GENERAL is NOT an "expert" on education. The DISTRICT ATTORNEY is NOT an "expert" on education... and neither are you.
EDUCATION Commissioner Driscoll IS an "expert" on educational methods and content, and he clearly said that the workshop's content was not educational. EDUCATION Commissioner Driscoll does NOT claim to be an "expert" on the General Laws of Massachusettes.
Because of the DISTRICT ATTORNEY's lack of expertise on educational matters, The DA should have sought an expert opinion.
The DISTRICT ATTORNEY chose not to consider an expert opinion and, to our knowledge, has NEVER officially dismissed Whiteman's complaint.
The DISTRICT ATTORNEY, as a public official, has a duty to respond to the complaint and the tax-paying public has a right to know the official ruling on the complaint. Can you produce a verifiable public record that clearly shows that the DA has officially dismissed Scott Whiteman's complaint?
"so as to appeal predominantly to the prurient interest of minors..."
"It was a Question and Answer exercise, a TEXTBOOK example of an educational exercise."
And your credentials as an education expert are? We have the highest ranking educational official in the state of Massachusetts stating that he listened to what the workshop presenters actually discussed with minor children and, in his professional judgement, the discussion (Q&A as you call it) was "not educational" and "contributed absolutely nothing to the students' understanding" (meaning it had no educational value).
SECTION 31 of the GENERAL LAWS of MASSACHUSETTS DEFINES matter that is OBSCENE and HARMFUL to MINORS:
"Harmful to minors'', matter is harmful to minors if it is obscene or, if taken as a whole, it (1) describes or represents nudity, sexual conduct or sexual excitement, so as to appeal predominantly to the prurient interest of minors; (2) is patently contrary to prevailing standards of adults in the county where the offense was committed as to suitable material for such minors; and (3)lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.
"Obscene'', matter is obscene if taken as a whole it (1) appeals to the prurient interest of the average person applying the contemporary standards of the county where the offense was committed; (2) depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; and (3) lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value...
The following definitions are from "Webster's Desk Dictionary of the English Language," 1990 edition:
prurient - (2) causing lasciviousness or lust.
lasciviousness - (2) arousing sexual desire.
describe - (1) to depict in words.
depict - (2) to represent in words.
EDUCATION Commissioner Driscoll determined that the material being DESCRIBED and DEPICTED to MINORS by the workshop presenters was (1) sexually explicit; (2) of prurient nature; (3) not educational; and (4) wrong. Specifically, he said:
"The participation of our staff in conversations with students about explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention was wrong. The workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational, and what we heard suggests that the discussion contributed absolutely nothing to the students' understanding of how to avoid AIDS and HIV."
All this is relevant because Camenker and Whiteman had a civic duty to expose the harmful and obscene material being discussed with minors in GLSEN's workshops. The audio tape substantiated Camenker's and Whiteman's claims. And the tape revealed that discussions with similar (and even worse) obscene and harmful content are being introduced in the public school curriculum by teachers who bring in homosexual "guest speakers" to their classes.
You are certainly entitled to express your (unqualified) opinion on whether or not the workshop was educational. However, no matter how many times you post the same nonsense, it will not connote validity.
I will respond to the remainder of your reply diatribe later.
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.