FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Fri., March 28, 2008
CONTACT: Gary Glenn 989-835-7978
Sen. Randy Richardville 517-373-3543

Richardville: “I will in no way support” bills as written

Trojan Horse “bullying”
bill loses 2nd GOP sponsor

Further blow to bill following homosexual activists’ “lobbying day”

LANSING — Two days after homosexual activist groups gathered at the state Capitol to pressure lawmakers to support a bill purported to protect public school students from bullying, a second Republican state senator who originally co-sponsored the legislation announced that he no longer supports the bill and would vote against it as written.

SB 107 original co-sponsors: http://www.legislature.mi.gov…2007-SB-0107

Sen. Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, one of only four Republicans listed among twenty co-sponsors of Democratic Sen. Glenn Anderson’s Senate Bill 107, said Friday in an e-mail to the American Family Association of Michigan that while he supports protecting students from bullying, he no longer agrees with the legislation’s segregation of students into special “protected class” categories.

(See full text of Richardville e-mail below)

The loss of a second senator previously on record supporting the legislation came as a blow to the bill’s promoters after over a hundred homosexual activists and their allies gathered at the state Capitol Wednesday for a so-called “Safe Schools Lobbying Day,” specifically intended to pressure more state senators to support the bill. The original list of 20 cosponsors had itself constituted a majority of the 38-member Senate; with the loss of two of those cosponsors, the bill no longer has a sure majority.

Original cosponsor Sen. Valde Garcia, R-Howell, Wednesday was the first to withdraw his support, and AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn, Midland, Friday predicted the bill may lose other original co-sponsors as well, and not just among the two remaining Republicans, Sen. Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, and Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks.

Glenn has characterized the bill as “Trojan Horse” legislation that would have no real effect on bullying but is being backed by homosexual activist groups who hope to use legitimate public concern about student safety as a ruse to establish — for the first time ever, anywhere in Michigan law — special “protected class” status based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.

Richardville, who Thursday evening discussed the legislation with Glenn by phone, Friday wrote that he had originally supported the bill’s approach but has since changed his mind.

“Per our conversation, let me reiterate I will in no way support the current version of Senate Bill 107 or (similar House-passed legislation),” Richardville wrote. “…First, I thought it best to delineate every potential cause of bullying, however I realize by segregating some I diminished the importance of others.”

Glenn noted that Richardville’s change of heart echoed Garcia’s objections to the bill.

“After being told that the goal was to prevent bullying in our public schools, a concept I support, I signed on as a co-sponsor of this legislation,” Garcia wrote Glenn Wednesday. “It was not until after the bill was introduced that I became aware of the exact definition of ‘harassment and bullying’ used in the bill, giving me serious concern about the bill’s intent. Because the bill gave special protection to certain groups of people, I immediately contacted the bill sponsor and told him that I could not support the bill as drafted and urged him to amend the bill so I could support it. …(S)hould this bill come before (the Senate) for consideration with no changes to the current definition of ‘harassment or bullying,’ I will not support the legislation.”

Glenn said the two senators’ experience “is proof of the deceptive nature of this Trojan Horse legislation and the way homosexual activist groups and their Democratic allies have tried to mislead not only state legislators but the general public.”

Glenn said SB 107 as written would require public schools to segregate students into special “protected” class categories, then dole out protection against bullying to students based on their membership in those categories — including, for the first time ever in Michigan law, categories based on “sexual orientation” (homosexual behavior) and “gender identity and expression” (cross-dressing). The precedent of those new segregated categories are the real agenda behind the legislation, he said, proven by the bill’s supporters’ opposition last year to AFA-Michigan-supported language that instead of creating segregated categories would have simply prohibited bullying against all students, no matter what the motivation.

Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, last year attempted to amend the House version of the legislation to strike the language segregating students into “protected class” categories and replace it with language simply and expressly prohibiting all bullying against all students for all reasons. House Democratic leaders refused to even allow a vote on Moolenaar’s amendment, and the legislation passed the House on a largely party-line vote. http://www.gophouse.com/readarticle.asp?id=4231&District=98

The Michigan Association of School Boards has in the past warned school districts against referring to “sexual orientation” in their anti-harassment policies.

As the Oakland Press reported: “Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term ‘sexual orientation’ in their anti-harassment policies. ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class. He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.” http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/031305/edu_20050313006.shtml

Glenn said he has informed lawmakers and supporters of the legislation that if it is amended to protect all students from bullying without creating precedent-setting “protected class” status for the first time based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing, AFA-Michigan will no longer urge lawmakers to oppose it.

He noted however, that some lawmakers and mainstream media have opposed the legislation on a broader basis. The Lansing State Journal and the Grand Rapids Press, for example, have editorially opposed the bills, arguing that public school safety is being competently handled by caring local parents, educators, school boards, and law enforcement personnel without mandates by the state Legislature.

To read the full text of both Sen. Richardville’s and Sen. Garcia’s emails, click on the link below.

(more…)

“Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, which is opposed to the measures, said he doesn’t think all 20 of (the bill’s) co-sponsors would vote for the bill if it came to the Senate floor… Much of the controversy regarding the bills hinges on a requirement that, while local school districts would have to have some form of anti-bullying policy, they would be encouraged to adopt a model policy drafted by the state Department of Education (that)…includes protections for students bullied because of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.

Glenn called that provision a ruse to establish ‘special “protected class” status based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.’ Advocates were dealt another blow Wednesday when Sen. Valde Garcia, R-Howell, who had originally signed on as a co-sponsor for the bill, said he would not vote for it should it reach the Senate floor.”

LANSING STATE JOURNAL
Lansing, Michigan
March 27, 2008

Anti-bullying bills advocates
“optimistic” at Capitol rally

“Matt’s Safe School Law” stalls

by Derek Wallbank

Concerns over whether anti-bullying legislation would give homosexual and transgendered students protected status appear to have stalled the measure in the state Senate.

The legislation is “Matt’s Safe School Law,” a two-bill package that would require local schools to adopt rules prohibiting bullying.

The bills are named after Matt Epling, an East Lansing teenager who killed himself in 2002 after a school hazing incident.

The bills passed the House in March 2007 and have languished in the Senate Education Committee ever since.

Rallying for support

On Wednesday, Matt’s father, Kevin Epling, and about 150 other anti-bullying activists gathered in the Capitol rotunda to rally support for the law.

“I’m optimistic,” Epling said of the bills’ chances. “I have to be optimistic or I wouldn’t be doing this.”

Twenty of 36 senators have co-sponsored the legislation, enough to pass it by majority vote.

Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, which is opposed to the measures, said he doesn’t think all 20 of those co-sponsors would vote for the bill if it came to the Senate floor, but said his group isn’t taking any chances.

“The easiest way to make sure this doesn’t pass is to make sure it doesn’t come up for a vote,” Glenn said.

Similar bills have been offered since 1999, though none have been signed into law.

Liz Boyd, spokeswoman for Gov. Jennifer Granholm, said the governor will sign the bill into law if it passes the Senate.

State Superintendent Mike Flanagan said the bill would be especially useful because it would get communities talking about bullying.

“First of all, it gets us out of denial to pretend this isn’t a problem. It is,” Flanagan said.

Committee Chair Sen. Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland, could not be reached for comment.

Model policy

Much of the controversy regarding the bills hinges on a requirement that, while local school districts would have to have some form of anti-bullying policy, they would be encouraged to adopt a model policy drafted by the state Department of Education.

That policy already exists and it includes protections for students bullied because of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.

Glenn called that provision a ruse to establish “special ‘protected class’ status based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.”

Advocates were dealt another blow Wednesday when Sen. Valde Garcia, R-Howell, who had originally signed on as a co-sponsor for the bill, said he would not vote for it should it reach the Senate floor.

“I want to stop bullying, but I don’t want a laundry list,” Garcia said of the state’s list of protected students.
“Rather than be specific about it, let’s just focus on bullied persons.”

Work will continue

Despite the setback, advocates said they would continue pressing the issue.

“I was kind of told to go home back in 2003,” Epling said, adding that he hopes a bullying bill will pass this year.

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080327/NEWS04/803270346/1005/news

Sen. Garcia “will not support” legislation as written

Trojan Horse “bullying”
bill loses GOP co-sponsor

Loss comes as blow to bill on homosexual activists’ “lobbying day”

LANSING — On a day hundreds of homosexual activists gathered at the state Capitol to pressure lawmakers to support a bill purported to protect public school students from bullying, a Republican state senator who originally co-sponsored the legislation Wednesday announced that he no longer supports the bill and will vote against it as written.

SB 107 co-sponsors: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/….2007-SB-0107

Sen. Valde Garcia, R-Howell, one of only four Republicans listed among twenty co-sponsors of Democratic Sen. Glenn Anderson’s Senate Bill 107, said Wednesday in an e-mail to the American Family Association of Michigan that while he supports protecting students from bullying, he was not aware of the bill’s specific provisions until after agreeing to co-sponsor it.

(See full text of Garcia e-mail below)

The loss of a senator previously on record supporting the legislation came as a blow to the bill’s supporters on the day hundreds of homosexual activists gathered at the state Capitol for a so-called “Safe Schools Lobbying Day,” specifically intended to pressure more state senators to support the bill.

AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn, Midland, predicted the bill may lose other original co-sponsors as well, and not just among the three remaining Republicans — Sen. Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, Sen. Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, and Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks.

Glenn has characterized the bill as “Trojan Horse” legislation that would have no real effect on bullying but is backed by homosexual activist groups who hope to use legitimate concerns about student safety as a ruse to establish — for the first time ever, anywhere in Michigan law — special “protected class” status based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.

Garcia’s letter proves that even some solidly conservative lawmakers were initially misled, he said.

“After being told that the goal was to prevent bullying in our public schools, a concept I support, I signed on as a co-sponsor of this legislation,” Garcia wrote Glenn. “It was not until after the bill was introduced that I became aware of the exact definition of ‘harassment and bullying’ used in the bill, giving me serious concern about the bill’s intent. Because the bill gave special protection to certain groups of people, I immediately contacted the bill sponsor and told him that I could not support the bill as drafted and urged him to amend the bill so I could support it.”

Garcia concluded that “should this bill come before (the Senate) for consideration with no changes to the current definition of ‘harassment or bullying,’ I will not support the legislation.”

Glenn praised Garcia’s record on family values issues in the Senate and said the GOP lawmaker’s experience “is proof of the deceptive nature of this Trojan Horse legislation and the way homosexual activist groups and their Democratic allies have tried to mislead not only state legislators but the general public.”

Glenn said SB 107 as written would require public schools to segregate students into special “protected” class categories, then dole out protection against bullying to students based on their membership in those categories — including, for the first time ever in Michigan law, categories based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing. The precedent of those new segregated categories are the real agenda behind the legislation, he said, proven by the bill’s supporters’ opposition last year to language that instead of creating segregated categories would have simply prohibited bullying against all students, no matter what the motivation.

Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, last year attempted to amend the House version of the legislation to strike the language segregating students into “protected class” categories and replace it with language simply and expressly prohibiting all bullying against all students for all reasons. House Democratic leaders refused to even allow a vote on Moolenaar’s amendment, and the legislation passed the House on a largely party-line vote. http://www.gophouse.com/readarticle.asp?id=4231&District=98

The Michigan Association of School Boards has in the past warned school districts against referring to “sexual orientation” in their anti-harassment policies. As the Oakland Press reported: “Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term ‘sexual orientation’ in their anti-harassment policies. ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class. He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.” http://www.theoaklandpress.com…20050313006.shtml

Glenn said he has informed lawmakers and supporters of the legislation that if it is amended to protect all students from bullying without creating precedent-setting “protected class” status for the first time based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing, AFA-Michigan will no longer urge lawmakers to oppose it.

He noted however, that some lawmakers and mainstream media have opposed the legislation on a broader basis. The Lansing State Journal and the Grand Rapids Press, for example, have editorially opposed state-mandated “bullying” bills, arguing that public school safety is being competently handled by caring local parents, educators, school boards, and law enforcement personnel without mandates by the state Legislature.

Click on the link below to read the full text of Sen. Garcia’s email to AFA-MI:

(more…)

Triangle Foundation urges dress code Wed. at Capitol

Homosexual activist groups don’t want to
be “recognized” as homosexual activists

Family group: What don’t they want lawmakers to see?

LANSING — A who’s who of Michigan homosexual activist groups will convene at the state Capitol Wednesday to push legislation that a statewide family values organization calls a Trojan Horse bill only masquerading as protection against bullying in public schools.

The American Family Association of Michigan says the legislation would have no actual effect on student safety, but would set the precedent of creating — for the first time anywhere in Michigan law — special “protected class” status based on so-called “sexual orientation” (homosexual behavior) and “gender identity and expression” (cross-dressing).

“Obviously sensitive to the waning political prospects of their now thoroughly exposed Trojan Horse strategy, homosexual activists apparently hope it might help if they take their masquerade tactic one step further, this time literally so,” said AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn of Midland.

Glenn pointed to the website of the Triangle Foundation, a homosexual activist group based in Detroit. Denying any attempt to “censor who we are,” the Triangle website Tuesday posted an online dress code urging those planning to participate in Wednesday’s “Safe Schools Lobbying Day” not to wear clothing or costumes by which they might be “recognized” or “labeled” as involved in the homosexual lifestyle or cross-dressing.

“What is it that homosexual activists don’t want Michigan lawmakers to see?” Glenn asked.

“In the sad reality of enabling emotional trauma and delusion that comprises their stock in trade,” Glenn said, “it is not a joking matter to wonder if the Triangle Foundation’s wardrobe instructions will further traumatize or inhibit the emotionally disturbed men who claim they’re really women, who had every serious intent of wearing a dress to the state Capitol and using the women’s restrooms while they’re there. Is the Triangle Foundation asking ‘lobbying day’ participants to go back into the closet for mere political expedience?”

According to Triangle’s website, Wednesday’s “lobbying day” is sponsored by the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, Michigan Equality (a Lansing “gay rights” group), the Human Rights Campaign (purportedly the largest national “gay rights” group), ACLU-Michigan (which represents “gay rights” groups in court), the American Friends Services Committee’s Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Issues Program, Affirmations (a “gay and lesbian” community center in Ferndale), the Coalition for Adoption Rights for Everyone (which lobbies for “gay” adoption rights), the National Organization of Women-Michigan, and, of course, the Triangle Foundation.

“All these groups have something obviously in common,” Glenn observed. “But Triangle doesn’t want the people representing all these lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender activist groups to be ‘recognized’ or ‘labeled’ as a lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender activist group.”

The “lobbying day” dress code appeared Tuesday on Triangle’s website as follows:

“Due to the importance and sensitivity of this day, we ask that those planning to attend reflect their views and opinions in their dialogs (sic) with individuals and not with their attire. Items that may be a sign of your status as Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender or ally could distract from the message of the day. This legislation is for safe schools for all students, including those in our community. Lansing should recognize us as equal residents and not label us as Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender. We hope that you understand our request and accept that this is not an attempt to censor who we are, but to allow us to be seen as concerned citizens first.” http://www.tri.org/ssld.html

“Homosexual activists are trying to disguise who they are,” Glenn said, “just as they’re trying to disguise the real agenda behind this Trojan Horse ‘bullying’ legislation.”

“Since homosexual activists and their political allies oppose language that would simply protect all children from all bullying for all reasons, it’s clear that their real agenda is to use legitimate concern over student safety to sneak special rights based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing into Michigan law for the first time,” he said. “And then to use that as a precedent to add special rights and protected status based on that unhealthy behavior to Michigan’s civil rights and hate crime laws, threatening the religious freedom and free speech rights of individuals and organizations who oppose homosexual activists’ political agenda.”

Last year, Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, attempted to amend the legislation to strike language segregating students into special “protected class” categories — including, for the first time ever in Michigan law, “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression” — and replace it with language prohibiting all bullying against all students for all reasons.”
http://www.gophouse.com/readarticle.asp?id=4231&District=98

House Democrats refused to even allow a vote on that amendment. The legislation was passed a year ago by the House and has since languished in the state Senate.

The Michigan Association of School Boards warns members not to include “sexual” orientation in school harassment or bullying policies: “Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term “sexual orientation” in their anti-harassment policies. ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class. He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.” (The Oakland Press, March 13, 2005: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/031305/edu_20050313006.shtml)

The Lansing State Journal editorially opposes the so-called “bullying” legislation: “A state law isn’t going to make school hallways bully free. …The most recent bills already have cleared the House and are awaiting action by the Senate. Their prospects are uncertain, though, as Republicans and ‘family values’ advocates are protesting the inclusion of ‘sexual orientation’ as one of the characteristics specifically mentioned in the bills. Michigan isn’t going to benefit right now from a battle over which characteristics deserve protection from bullies. It’s divisive and unnecessary. …Whenever the Legislature has taken up the bullying issue, the impression left is that local school districts and boards lack the interest to act. How can that be? …Do state lawmakers really think that school boards don’t care about protecting schoolchildren; that lawmakers in the state Capitol have a better grip on hallway happenings than parents and community members?” (April 17, 2007)

The Grand Rapids Press editorially opposes the so-called “bullying” legislation: “Proposed legislation in Lansing that would require schools to adopt a policy that prohibits bullying and harassment is well-intentioned but unnecessary. Lawmakers should reject it. Schools already have policies to combat bullying and effectively deal with those perpetrators who assault, harass or intimidate other students. …The Senate should realize the bully matter isn’t being overlooked by schools. Educators don’t need the state to take control.” (April 4, 2007)

Dear AFA-Michigan supporter,

The Triangle Foundation, Michigan Equality, Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, and other homosexual activist groups are urging individuals involved in the homosexual lifestyle to contact their state senator this Wednesday to urge support for homosexual activists’ Trojan Horse “bullying” bills.

As one state legislator observed to me over the phone this past weekend, these so-called “bullying” bills have nothing to do with bullying. In fact, homosexual activists and their Democrat allies in the state House of Representatives opposed language that would have simply prohibited all bullying against all students for all reasons. (See Midland Daily News: http://www.ourmidland.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18143125&BRD=2289&PAG=461&dept_id=472542&rfi=6)

The real agenda behind this Trojan Horse legislation is to establish — for the first time ever, anywhere in Michigan law — special “protected class” status on the basis of homosexual behavior and cross-dressing; in this case, public school students who engage in such behavior.

Homosexual activists hope to use legitimate concern about student safety as a subterfuge to sneak special rights based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression” into law for the first time, then use that as precedent for inserting special protection for such behavior into Michigan’s “hate crime” and “civil rights” laws. And as it has in other countries and cities that have already created special status based on homosexual behavior, that will pose a direct threat to your religious freedom and free speech rights.

Even the Michigan Association of School Boards has warned school boards about the legal hazards of creating special rights and protections based on so-called “sexual orientation.”

As the Oakland Press reported:

“Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term ‘sexual orientation’ in their anti-harassment policies. ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class. He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.”

Please help AFA-Michigan stop this dangerous precedent-setting “gay rights” legislation:

1. Please click here to find your state Senator: http://senate.michigan.gov

2. Please send your Senator an e-mail urging him to vote against homosexual activists’ so-called “bullying” legislation. Specifically, urge him to vote against Senate Bill 107 and House Bills 4091 and 4162.

3. Please also e-mail Senate Education Committee Chairman Wayne Kuipers and urge him not to even schedule these “bullying” bills for consideration. E-mail: senwkuipers@senate.michigan.gov

4. Finally, please make the largest tax-deductible contribution you can today to the American Family Association of Michigan to make sure we have the resources to continue to stand guard for you and your family.

Contribute online: https://www.campaigncontribution.com/version6/process/info.asp?id=1700&jid=

Contribute by mail:
AFA-Michigan
PO Box 1904
Midland, Michigan 48641

We deeply appreciate your support!

God bless and keep you strong…

Gary Glenn, President
AFA-Michigan

“Hundreds of educators, students and community members are expected to descend upon the State Capitol next week to demand the Senate pass a comprehensive bill aimed at stopping bullying in schools. …’The future of this bill is in the hands of Senate leaders,’ said Sean Kosofsky, policy director of the Triangle Foundation, an anti-violence and (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender) advocacy group in Detroit. ‘Governor Granholm has said that if it passes, she will sign it.’ …The inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression in the bills has fired up family advocacy groups like the American Family Association of Michigan. During last year’s lobby event, AFA Michigan’s Gary Glenn was sending faxes condemning the bills and calling on the Legislature to kill the final bill.”

MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
March 20, 2008

Anti-bullying forces to descend on Capitol to get Senate to pass bill
by: Todd A. Heywood

LANSING — Hundreds of educators, students and community members are expected to descend upon the State Capitol next week to demand the Senate pass a comprehensive bill aimed at stopping bullying in schools. The bill passed the state House a year ago, but has since languished in the Senate awaiting a hearing.

The event will happen Wednesday, March 26, from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. at the Capitol. The bill, Matt’s Safe School Law, would require school districts to create and report to the state an anti-bullying policy. Some oppose the bill because it includes a list of protected categories, including sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. The bill is named for Matt Epling, an East Lansing Schools student who committed suicide as a result of harassment and bullying.

“I think if you are going to make a statement on bullying, you don’t make special classes of students,” said State Sen. Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland, chair of the Senate Education Committee. “Bullying is a symptom of a larger problem.” Kuipers said he is working on substitute bills that would address the bigger problems behind bullying. “It is a lack of respect for others,” Kuipers said of the root of the problem. “They (students) are not being taught the proper way to deal with others.” Kuipers said his substitute bills would cause a bigger discussion about what he called “character education.” “In the context of that character discussion, there will be some discussion on bullying.”

The new bills are currently being redrafted and he expects them to be taken up after the Senate’s two-week spring break, which begins on next Friday. He said he has meetings with Lobby Day participants that day. Asked if he would attend the Lobby Day event, Kuiper said: “No. I wasn’t invited.” Organizer’s of Wednesday’s Lobby Day hope to push the Senate to hold hearings on Matt’s Safe Schools law. “Make no mistake, the Senate is a much different battlefield than the House because of party affiliation and individuals involved in letting legislation move or not,” said Derek Smiertka, executive director of Michigan Equality, a statewide LGBT rights organization.

“The future of this bill is in the hands of Senate leaders,” said Sean Kosofsky, policy director of the Triangle Foundation, an anti-violence and LGBT advocacy group in Detroit. “Governor Granholm has said that if it passes, she will sign it. We have the broadest possible coalition pushing this bill. We think it’s the best possible compromise to keep everyone pleased.” The House version of the bill passed last March during the Safe Schools Lobby Day although the vote had been unanticipated by Lobby Day organizers. Organizers had expected a vote three weeks after the Lobby Day. Instead they were presented with a substitute bill that required school districts to adopt an anti-bullying policy similar to the model policy passed in September 2006 by the State Board of Education. The model policy includes a list of protected categories, based on things like sexual orientation, gender identity and expression.

The inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression in the bills has fired up family advocacy groups like the American Family Association of Michigan. During last year’s lobby event, AFA Michigan’s Gary Glenn was sending faxes condemning the bills and calling on the Legislature to kill the final bill.

http://www.michiganmessenger.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=E00C93EDA1E192A2D233F788FBFC0AEB?diaryId=1015

MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
February 28, 2008

New stem cell controversy: Harvest
sperm from woman, eggs from man
by Ed Brayton

“Gary Glenn, director of the American Family Association of Michigan, told the Michigan Messenger: ‘The ideal that’s in every child’s best interests is to have both a mother and a father. Selfishly denying a child one or the other on purpose, by whatever means, is obviously not in the child’s best interest. Obviously, being able to harvest male sperm cells from a woman’s bone marrow doesn’t make her a father, which every boy needs and deserves, any more than harvesting unfertilized eggs from a man’s bone marrow will make him the mother that every little girl needs.’”

http://www.michiganmessenger.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=924

Dear AFA-Michigan supporter,

Royal Oak City Commission
Phone: 248-246-3200
E-mails: cmellison@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; ccandrzejak@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; ccdrinkwine@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; ccginotti@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; cclelito@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; ccmiller@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; ccsemchena@ci.royal-oak.mi.us

Royal Oak Public Library
Phone: 248-246-3700
E-mail: Scottn@ci.royal-oak.mi.us

Thanks as always for your support!

Gary Glenn, President
AFA-Michigan

DAILY TRIBUNE
Royal Oak, Michigan
February 28, 2008

(Guest editorial)

All libraries in need of filters

The Royal Oak Public Library’s mind-numbingly outrageous refusal to install Internet child pornography-blocking software on library computers illustrates a point of interest of which the general public is likely not aware.

Gary Glenn, President
American Family Association of Michigan
Midland

DAILY TRIBUNE
Royal Oak, Michigan
February 29, 2008

(Front page)

Library porn incident prompts call for filters
Oversight board upholds current policy on adult computers

by Catherine Kavanaugh
Daily Tribune Staff Writer

ROYAL OAK — The recent arrest of a man accused of viewing child pornography in the Royal Oak Public Library adult computer lab has at least one elected official calling for the installation of filters to block obscene Web sites.

City Commissioner Terry Drinkwine said he will raise the issue at a Monday meeting. He would like the commission to pass a resolution asking the Library Board to install technology that could prevent similar incidents.

The library uses filters on the computers in the youth section, but not the 16 computers in the adult lab. That’s where police say James Mullaney, 38, of Royal Oak, accessed four pictures of a girl who appeared to be under the age of 12 having sex with an adult male and one picture of a naked girl.

“This is the one guy we know about,” Drinkwine said. “You can talk all you want about freedom, but in my mind in no way, shape or form should those computers be able to produce anything illegal, illicit or detrimental.”

Board reaffirms policy

On Tuesday, board members unanimously voted to maintain their 8-year-old policy to only filter youth computers.

“That’s because we respect the adults and we know filters don’t work well,” Director Metta Lansdale said. “They have some value when kids use the Internet, but they make adults feel mad and disrespected.”

The Library Board has reaffirmed this position yearly since 2004, Lansdale added. They did so again this week despite the Feb. 5 arrest of Mullaney, who faces trial on five counts of possession of child sexually abusive material, a five-year felony, and five counts of using a computer to commit a crime, which is a seven-year felony. He is being held in jail on a $100,000 cash bond.

Lansdale said the Library Board took the incident into account.

“They did their homework, they deliberated and they kept their position because it’s not an issue,” she said. “This is the first incident of child pornography brought to our attention. The library acted appropriately. We were trained and ready.”

A Royal Oak man who used the computer after Mullaney discovered the illegal pictures in minimized windows at the start of his session. He notified the library staff and they called police.

Drinkwine contends the incident merits a closer look by the Library Board. He wants them to take another vote and approve filters for adult computers.

“I can’t make them do it, but I can ask officially and let the public know they can install filters. But they refuse,” Drinkwine said. “This is no different than saying we’re not going to have a reading room filled with Hustler magazines. It makes no sense to me to balk at this request.”

Support for board

The board’s policy makes sense to the American Library Association, which discourages Internet filters for adults and doesn’t endorse any protective software for libraries to install.

“Filters are not perfect. They all over-block or under-block,” said Deborah Caldwell-Stone, deputy director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

She said libraries and communities need to answer three questions during filter debates: Is there really a problem? Will filters solve it? Should a government agency block content?

“With filters you think you’re doing something good, but you hand off part of your library collection to a private company that often has an agenda,” Caldwell-Stone said. “If the company is affiliated with a religious organization, you are buying their prejudices.”

She also points to a 2002 study by the Kaiser Family Foundation called “See No Evil: How Internet Filters Affect the Search for Online Health Information.” The study found that Internet filters set on the most restrictive level block 24 percent of all health sites and 50 percent of all sexual health sites dealing with issues, such as condoms and safe sex.

“And they let through 9-13 percent of the porn,” Caldwell-Stone said. “Filters give a false dichotomy. You think you’re protecting people, but there are holes. It’s a false sense of protection.”

Debate started in ’90s

City Commissioner Michael Andrzejak remembers when the issue of Internet filters originally was tackled by the Library Board. He was a member in the mid- to late 1990s.

“It was one of the most contentious discussions I was involved with,” Andrzejak said. “People raised concerns that filters would block research of breast cancer or Super Bowl XXX as something X-rated. But that was the first generation of filters. I’m sure they are much better now.”

Caldwell-Stone isn’t.

“Any honest vendor will say they don’t block all the bad stuff,” she said.

When the topic of filters first came up in Royal Oak, the Library Board was divided between conservative and liberal members, according to Andrzejak.

“It was a dogfight to get filters on the children’s computers,” he recalled. “For adults, we agreed there would be constant staff oversight.”

Andrzejak doesn’t see that as a viable solution anymore, and he wants information on the latest filtering technology.

“Now it’s unreasonable to think this number of computers can be monitored by the staff, and I have to question whether it is the best use of their time,” he said.

Drinkwine asks the same question. He wants residents to weigh in with their opinions.

“This is a public building with kids and families,” he said. “The library should reflect the values of the community. That’s why I asked for this to be on the published agenda. I am drawing a line in the sand. If people are for it or against it, let them say so.”

The City Commission meets at 7:30 p.m. Monday at City Hall.

http://www.dailytribune.com/stories/022908/loc_localn02.shtml