———————————-

ONE NEWS NOW
Tupelo, Mississippi
April 26, 2010

Rep’s kind words encourage family advocate
by Charlie Butts

A congressman has extended encouraging words to initiators of a federal lawsuit against the hate crimes” law.

Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, tells OneNewsNow the letter came from Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa).

“We’re gratified to receive Congressman King’s letter,” Glenn comments. “He’s known across the nation as a stalwart defender of religious freedom, of Judeo-Christian values, and so to have someone of his stature commend us for taking a stand against this so-called ‘hate crimes’ law is certainly gratifying.”

The letter was unsolicited, and the AFA-Michigan president goes on to say that the hate crimes law is dangerous to the nation and to people of faith because it forces the courts to become thought police.

“If you talk to homosexual activists, they are very clear [and] very plain about their intent for the use of hate crimes laws,” Glenn notes. “It is to be used against individuals who merely speak out, who dare oppose their public policy agenda.”

Although the U.S. has constitutional protections for speech, Canada’s hate crimes law offers an example of the possible outcome. Several people there have been taken before a human rights commission for speaking against the homosexual lifestyle, one being a youth pastor who was just commenting on what the Bible says about it.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=986382
__________________________________________________

Kuipers: Anti-bullying legislation stalled by lack of definition
Lawmaker wants local schools to define bullying instead of state

by Todd A. Heywood

“The (‘anti-bullying’) legislation has been working its way through the legislature for the better part of a decade… the sticking point was whether or not to enumerate, or list, protected categories. Conservative lawmakers had opposed the enumeration because it included sexual orientation and gender identity and/or expression. Rallied by Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan, conservatives argued the inclusion of those categories would result in forwarding the so-called ‘homosexual agenda.’”

http://michiganmessenger.com/36885/kuipers-state-cant-define-bullying

__________________________________________________

Glenn told WND, ‘We’re gratified to receive Congressman King’s letter commending our civil rights lawsuit to overturn a law that — if used like similar ‘hate crime’ laws at the state level and abroad — will eventually threaten religious free speech rights by persecuting pastors and others who merely express disapproval of homosexual behavior and the political agenda that aggressively seeks to legitimize and promote it to our children.’”

WORLD NET DAILY
Washington, D.C.
April 20, 2010

U.S. congressman backs ‘hate crimes’ lawsuit
Tells pastors law is ‘unprecedented move to criminalize our thoughts’

U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=143513
__________________________________________________

Does Romneycare = Obamacare? Cato says yes
by Mark Tapscott, Editorial Page Editor

WATCH VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IJsiBHYTFg&feature=player_embedded

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is widely considered to be the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, but the biggest obstacle he may have to overcome could well be Romneycare, one of his signature programs while serving as the Bay State’s chief executive.

More than a few people within and without the GOP – including most notably President Obama and Democratic congressional leaders like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi – contend that Romney’s much celebrated health care reform of 2006 is quite similar to the Obamacare program that became law in 2010.

Romney strongly disputes that characterization, but the very fact it is becoming an issue is indicative of its seriousness as an obstacle to his winning the GOP presidential nomination.

Now comes the Cato Institute with a searing video critique of Romneycare that focuses on the major ways in which it resembles Obamacare. Watch this video and you will have a sense of the urgency of this issue for the Romney candidacy:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Does-Romneycare–Obamacare-Cato-says-yes-90982654.html
__________________________________________________

—————————————————————–

RIGHT WING WATCH
People for the American Way
Washington, D.C.
April 14, 2010

SCOTUS Round-Up: Right ready to spend
millions fighting gay nominee women don’t like

Remember last time around when various Religious Right groups were saying that they would not oppose a Supreme Court nominee just because said nominee was gay?

In fact, Focus on the Family’s Bruce Hausknecht went on record saying “the issue is not their sexual orientation. It’s whether they are a good judge or not”:

“Our concern at the Supreme Court is judicial philosophy,” FOF spokesperson Hausknecht continued. “Sexual orientation only becomes an issue if it effects their judging.” For example, he said, “If someone says, `I don’t care what the law says, on the next case involving sexual orientation, I’m going to decide the case in favor of the openly gay party,’ that would be a breach of judicial duty.”

Well, Focus received a lot of flack for that from professional anti-gay activists like Gary Glenn and Peter LaBarbera and now Focus’ Tom Minnery has “clarified” their position to LaBarbera, stating that the organization would oppose a gay nominee because said nominee would be, by definition, sinful and immoral:

“It has been reported that we would not oppose any U.S. Supreme Court nominee over their ’sexual orientation.’ Our Judicial Analyst [Bruce Hausknecht] made a statement to this effect in an interview with The Plum Line. To be honest, this is one of those conversations we’d like to ‘do over.’ We can assure you that we recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and does not reflect God’s created intent and desire for humanity. Further, we at Focus do affirm that character and moral rectitude should be key considerations in appointing members of the judiciary, especially in the case of the highest court in the land. Sexual behavior–be it heterosexual or homosexual–certainly lies at the heart of personal morality.”

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/scotus-round-right-ready-spend-millions-fighting-gay-nominee-women-dont
__________________________________________________

Please urge your state legislators to oppose House Bill 4192, which — by prohibiting “discrimination” based on so-called “gender identity” — would impose on our entire state this same bizarre attack on reality.

Contact your state representative: http://house.michigan.gov/find_a_rep.asp
Contact your state senator: http://senate.michigan.gov/SenatorInfo/find-your-senator.htm

————————————————————————————————-

“‘When we separate biology it gets very confusing for everyone,’ Mike Heath, president of the American Family Association of New England, told FoxNews.com. ‘Now we’re talking about bathrooms where ladies will entertain the possibility of men being in the restroom with them, and every woman I’ve talked to has indicated that they wouldn’t be comfortable with that.’ With the law affecting schools ranging from nursery level to post-doctorate studies, Heath says he’s concerned with the ramifications of opening up ‘this can of worms,’ especially when it comes to younger students. ‘I get a little more upset with the topic when it touches on young children and what they’re going to have to think about and process,’ he said.

Critics seem especially concerned about the mixing of genders in bathrooms and locker rooms. The commission’s proposal reads: ‘Transgender students must be allowed access to the bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity or expression or, if they prefer, to existing single-stall bathrooms.’”

——————————————————————-
FOX NEWS
New York, New York
April 9, 2010

Maine commission moves to ban gender
specific bathrooms, sports teams in schools

The Maine Human Rights Commissions is taking heat over a proposal to ban schools from enforcing gender divisions in sports teams, school organizations, bathrooms and locker rooms, saying forcing a student into a particular room or group because of their biological gender amounts to discrimination.

by Diane Macedo, FOXNews.com

AUGUSTA, Maine — The little girls’ room won’t be just for little girls anymore, if the Maine Human Rights Commission has its way.

The commission is taking heat over a controversial proposal to ban schools from enforcing gender divisions in sports teams, school organizations, bathrooms and locker rooms. It says forcing a student into a particular room or group because of his or her biological gender amounts to discrimination.

The issue came to light last year when the commission ruled that, under the Maine Human Rights Act, a school had discriminated against a 12-year-old transgender boy by denying him access to the girls’ bathroom.

Now the commission aims to issue guidelines on how schools should deal with similar situations in the future. It would make Maine the first state to implement such guidelines for schools as young as preschool and nursery — and even some private schools.

But not everyone in the state is on board with the current proposal.
Some school districts and organizations have criticized the commission for making its initial ruling without getting enough input from conservative groups, and then for coming up with proposed guidelines in what some described as closed-door sessions.

“The conservative side was never brought in on the discussion in the first place, if you look at who gave testimony, written testimony, etc., in the beginning,” Rev. Bob Celeste of Harrison told FoxNews.com. “When you only bring one side in, you’re not looking for an honest debate. You’re looking for an agenda.”

Once it came time to vote on the guidelines, the commission again came under fire for not doing enough to inform Mainers of the vote, and for not allowing the public to speak at the hearing where it was held.

“We found out about this hearing by accident. We were never informed of it,” said Celeste, who was the first person to speak out at the March hearing.

“When I went to the hearing I expected to ask, ‘Why are they doing this?’ And they said that they weren’t going to have public hearings,” he said. “I said ‘Mr. Chairman, it’s getting late, when are we going to be able to ask questions?’ and he said, ‘You can’t.’”

Celeste says he then walked out of the meeting, but other outraged citizens got very vocal after his departure and apparently persuaded the commission to postpone the vote.

Now those critics are looking to get their voices heard again at a public hearing on the issue next month.

“When we separate biology it gets very confusing for everyone,” Mike Heath, president of the American Family Association of New England, told FoxNews.com. “Now we’re talking about bathrooms where ladies will entertain the possibility of men being in the restroom with them, and every woman I’ve talked to has indicated that they wouldn’t be comfortable with that.”

With the law affecting schools ranging from nursery level to post-doctorate studies, Heath says he’s concerned with the ramifications of opening up “this can of worms,” especially when it comes to younger students.

“I get a little more upset with the topic when it touches on young children and what they’re going to have to think about and process,” he said.

Critics seem especially concerned about the mixing of genders in bathrooms and locker rooms. The commission’s proposal reads: “Transgender students must be allowed access to the bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity or expression or, if they prefer, to existing single-stall bathrooms.”

“There’s not a whole lot of places a girl can expect privacy, but the bathroom should be one of them,” said Celeste. “And there’s not a whole lot of places a boy expects privacy, but the bathroom should be one of them. Married couples close the door when they go to the bathroom.”

Ken Trump, President of National School Safety and Security Services, says the guidelines set out in the commission’s draft brochure pose some serious safety issues as well.

“If my kid walks into a girls’ bathroom and sees a man in there, the child is going to instinctively feel that something’s wrong. If you create an entirely new climate where anything goes, you’re going to create increased confusion, and those with ill intentions could take advantage of that confusion and decreased ability to make a distinction,” Trump told FoxNews.com.

“The reality is, every day we’re seeing more and more cases of exploitation of children and others, and this would be creating an environment where the risk is increased for that exploitation.”

Because the commission suggests that people won’t be obligated to supply medical documentation that proves they are transgender, Trump says the policy also paves the way for increased sexual activity on school grounds – both consensual and non-consensual.

“Educators at the middle school level struggle every day in trying to keep student hormonal issues under control so that the focus can be on education,” he said. “We certainly don’t need to create an environment to accelerate and exacerbate the issue and further the experimentation, the inappropriate comments, inappropriate touching, groping, grabbing, sexual assaults and in some cases, rapes in schools.”

Karen Kemble, the Director of Equal Opportunity for the University of Maine, says the university has not taken a position for or against the proposed guidelines, but she shared concerns over some of them, including schools’ inability to ask for “proof” of sexual orientation.

“This would leave the institution without any way to determine the bona fide nature of the gender identity or expression,” Kemble said in a letter to the commission.

“It is routine practice to seek documentation of non-obvious disabilities in the event of an accommodation request. Even in the case of religious accommodations, an employer may sometimes seek additional information regarding either the religious nature of the request or the sincerity of a particular belief,” she added.

As an NCAA institution, Kemble says the University of Maine system could also face many hurdles when it comes to incorporating the guidelines into its athletic program.

“Some of the issues that we face are that the NCAA has rules that if we, for example, allowed a transgender student to participate in gender-segregated sport, then that may raise concerns about fairness and also may spark action by the NCAA, she said.

“We certainly want to have a welcoming environment and are doing everything we can to support the right to gender identity and gender expression,” she added.

John Gause, counsel for the Maine Human Rights Commission, told FoxNews.com that the commission is still in the process of developing guidelines on how the Maine Human Rights Act “applies in the context of sexual orientation in schools and colleges.”

“A date and location for the public comment session will be finalized in the near future,” he wrote in an e-mail.

The commission said more information on the public hearing will be posted on its web site once those details are finalized.

Neither Gause nor the commission’s executive director, Pat Ryan, returned follow-up e-mails and phone calls seeking a response to concerns raised over the guidelines.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/08/maine-commission-moves-ban-gender-specific-school-bathrooms-teams/
__________________________________________________

We’ve been informing you recently of the latest bizarre twist in homosexual activists’ radical political agenda, demanding that men who claim to believe they’re women be legally recognized by the state as “females”…be allowed to use women’s restrooms, showers, locker and changing rooms, and other public facilities…be allowed to wear wigs, dresses, and makeup to work…and have businesses, public schools, and all other “public accommodations” penalized by law if they refuse to agree to these demands.

Half a dozen cities in Michigan, most recently Kalamazoo, have now passed local ordinances establishing special legal “rights” and protections based expressly on so-called “gender identity,” i.e., cross-dressing. Democrats in the state House of Representatives have introduced legislation to do the same statewide, which has already been passed by the House Judiciary Committee and awaits a vote on the House floor.

This radical agenda temporarily went statewide in 2005, when for a period of three weeks — until pressure from AFA-Michigan forced its reversal — Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land’s office actually approved a policy change under which men who had not had any type of so-called “sex-change” surgery could nonetheless have their driver’s license changed to legally identify them as “females” (and vice versa).

Policy change announced: http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=13314&section=news
Policy change reversed: http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=14010

If you want a preview of what you and your family may encounter in public places in Michigan in the future if this agenda is allowed to advance, and the kind of political and regulatory pressure businesses, schools, and other public facilities will face, please read the report below from a traditional family values advocacy organization in Massachusetts.

THEN TAKE ACTION. Please contact your state legislators today and urge them to vote against House Bill 4192, which would add the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to Michigan’s existing civil rights law — morally, legally, and politically equating homosexual behavior and cross-dressing with benign characteristics such as race, creed, color, and sex.

Contact your state representative: http://house.michigan.gov/find_a_rep.asp
Contact your state senator: http://senate.michigan.gov/SenatorInfo/find-your-senator.htm

Thanks for your support. By God’s grace and your continued support, AFA-Michigan will continue to stand as a roadblock to the advancement of homosexual and “transgender” activists’ radical political agenda in our state.

Respectfully,

Gary Glenn
AFA-Michigan
www.AFAMichigan.org
—————————————————————————————

April 9, 2010 MassResistance Update Pro-family activism “In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” - George Orwell

1. Transgender activists target popular Peabody restaurant — now threatened with loss of license, legal sanctions, for turning away men in dresses. (One man used official Mass. driver’s license identifying him as female!)   TAKE ACTION! It’s the latest in the homosexual movement’s campaign to force their radical agenda on all of society through legal intimidation – with the help of our state government working against us. A Peabody restaurant is being threatened with loss of their operating license and an expensive lawsuit because the doorman turned away men wearing women’s clothes (including short skirts). One of the men produced a valid Massachusetts driver’s license saying he’s a female – which the Patrick administration now allows as a gift to the homosexual movement. This gave the activists even more ammunition against the restaurant. The restaurant is now being forced by Peabody city officials to “negotiate” with the homosexual and transgender activists or face action by the city and state alcohol licensing boards. See our report here on Massachusetts giving female drivers’ licenses to men. Capone’s Italian American Restaurant in Peabody, a popular restaurant and bar, was recently targeted by a transgender activist group, apparently to set an example for others. Robert Knowles, a transgender activist from Saugus who wears women’s’ clothes in public and who goes by the name of “Ashley Amber Bottoms”, began bringing a group of men in women’s clothes (who call themselves the “Sisters Group”) to Capone’s after their transgender group meetings. An interesting footnote: The Sisters Group meets every Friday evening at the Peabody Marriott Hotel, site of the transgender conference in our video showing huge men using the women’s restroom. They then target a local restaurant for their cross-dresser challenge. Robert Knowles, a.k.a. “Ashley Amber Bottoms”, an unemployed crane operator from Saugus and transgender activist. It started with restroom issues After the first few visits, the Capone’s staff asked them to use the men’s restroom instead of the women’s restroom. They agreed to do that. But apparently their presence was causing so much disruption and discomfort to the restaurant’s patrons that when the group came on Jan.29, staff met them at the door and refused to let them in. The men of the “Sisters Family” have their own calling card. The men insisted that they had a legal right to be let in, and one of them showed them the Massachusetts driver’s license stating that he was a female, even though he was clearly a man wearing women’s clothes. As the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows described it: According to Bottoms, despite the women’s protests, the bouncer wouldn’t relent. “One girl offered to take off her wig to show what she looked like and I told her, ‘No. You shouldn’t have to do that to prove yourself to anybody,’ ” Bottoms said. Another transgender woman offered her license to the doorman, explaining that her DMV picture reflected the way she looks now; her long hair is natural. “The guy looked at us and said, ‘but you’re wearing makeup. I can’t tell,’” Bottoms said. “And I went, ‘you know that’s BS, because girls wear makeup!’ ” A third member of the social group is legally female, and produced a license to that effect. “And he looked at her and said, ‘Nope, because you’re really a guy.’ “ The men were apparently all prepared to take action. They immediately demanded to know the name of the manager. The next day they filed complaints with the City of Peabody, the District Attorney, various licensing boards, and other public officials, according to news reports. Hardcore activists. Mr. Knowles (as Ashley Bottoms), left, and friend at the State House for the Transgender Bill Public Hearing on July 14. (MassResistance photo) The Boston Globe reported it on Feb. 21 (Note that they describe the man with the “legal” female driver’s license as a “woman” but refer to “Bottoms” as “he”): Knowles, also known as Ashley Amber Bottoms, detailed the alleged snub in a letter to the city’s licensing board earlier this month. He contends that eight members of the group – including a woman – were barred entry by workers at Capone’s on Jan. 29. “The door staff told me we would not be allowed entrance because of how we were dressed and that men in skirts would not be allowed inside,’’ he wrote in the complaint. . . Knowles, an unemployed crane operator who dresses like a woman in public, said he had visited Capone’s on three prior occasions with the transgender social group he directs. The group has five chapters in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire. On Feb. 22, the case went before the Peabody Licensing Board. Over 30 homosexual activists from across the state crowded into the small basement hearing room to intimidate. Because of the possibility of losing their license, the owner of Capone’s had to cut short a vacation in Florida to be there. The transgender group hired a professional “permitting consultant”, C. Whiting Price, to push their agenda at the meeting. Owner of restaurant (center) surrounded by “Ashley Bottoms” and roomful of angry homosexual and transgender activists at Peabody License Board hearing on Feb. 22. “Mediation” — homosexual activists’ path to victory by intimidation At the meeting, Price apparently urged Peabody City Solicitor, John Christopher, and the Chairman of the Peabody Licensing Board, Minas Dakos, to pressure the restaurant’s owner to enter into “mediation” with the transgender group or else face an expensive hearing and possible loss of license, lawsuit, and loss of business. As one local newspaper reported: Rice said the end result of mediation could be anything from particular conditions put upon Capone’s, sensitivity training or citywide policy changes to require of all alcohol license holders in regards to gender issues. That pretty much says it all. Assistant City Solicitor Brian Barrett is acting as “mediator”. The restaurant was given until April 26 to come to a suitable agreement with the transgender activists, or face formal charges by the city and state authorities. These are the kinds of brutal tactics being used by the homosexual/transgender movement — working hand in glove with our own government officials to subvert community standards and freedoms of citizens. Newspaper coverage The homosexual lobby’s PR machine went to work pretty quickly on this. It’s interesting the slant that various media outlets took, what facts they get right, what they leave out (e.g., the Mass. driver’s license problem), and how often they refer to a man as “she”. CNHI News Service: Transgender club alleges discrimination (2/10/10) Local news report Boston Globe: Group accuses Capone’s of bias. (2/21/10) They refer to the man with the Mass. drivers license as a “woman” The Salem News: Transgender group, restaurant agree to mediation (2/23/10) Local newspaper report Boston Examiner: Sisters Family transgender women’s group, Capone’s restaurant enter into mediation (2/23/10)  Pro-homosexual news service Peabody/Lynnfield Weekly News: Transgender Club, Capone’s enter talks (2/24/10) Local newspaper report Bay Windows: Gender Discrimination alleged at Peabody Eatery (3/3/10) (3/3/10) Homosexual newspaper The Advocate: Trans group alleges restaurant discriminated (3/4/10)  National homosexual magazine MassResistance blog: “Gender Identity” Discrimination at Peabody Restaurant? (3/11/10)  Our own no-holds-barred reporting. Public officials won’t talk, or are hostile In early February, Peabody Licensing Board Chairman Minas Dakos told a reporter that he did not know what authority, if any, it had to deal with the allegation. But they seemed to have changed their opinion about that since then. MassResistance attempted to call the Peabody Licensing Board for a comment but could only get an answering machine. On Wednesday, we called the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission to ask them about this kind of situation, what laws the restaurant allegedly broke, the legal jurisdiction of the state commission, and how other restaurants should react in this situation. As soon as we told the person what the subject of our question was, he became quite hostile and refused to give us any information except to direct us to portions of the Commission’s website. Although he admitted that they do have jurisdiction in these matters, when we asked how restaurants should deal with this, he simply said, “we don’t give legal advice” – an odd answer for the group that supposedly tells businesses what to do in order to follow the law. (Unfortunately, this dismissive attitude is very common when state Massachusetts employees discover you have a pro-family point of view.) Was the restaurant breaking any laws? Is so-called “gender identity” a “protected” class, even though we can’t find that wording in any state laws? Is it a strange kind of “sexual orientation”? The Commission refused to answer any of our questions. We also tried on numerous occasions to reach Assistant City Solicitor Brian Barrett, who is in charge of mediating the “negotiations,” but he refused to take our calls and did not return messages. Gender Identity Disorder The elephant in the middle of the room is the fact that this is transgenderism, cross-dressing, and its related behaviors are advanced symptoms of Gender Identity Disorder, which is recognized by the mental health profession as a sickness that needs to be treated (besides a perversion), not something that must be forced unwillingly on the rest of society by threats of punishment. Homosexual and transgender movement jumping on board Not surprisingly, this has become a cause celebre in the homosexual and transgender movement. Even the national homosexual newspaper The Advocate is covering it. They see this kind of threat and intimidation as an important tactic in achieving their goals. In addition, according to homosexual blogs that we’ve seen, Capone’s has been harassed by homosexual activists, who have also organized a boycott against the restaurant. And it could get worse It’s bad enough that a business is being forced to “negotiate” with homosexual activists in order to avoid essentially being shut down. But this could be just the beginning. The Capone’s employees were lucky. If the Transgender Rights and Hate Crimes bill (H1728) passes, they could all get heavy fines and jail time for merely noting a difference, and the restaurant could face major problems. This is exactly what the homosexual and transgender movement wants. TAKE ACTION! Don’t let this happen in America. All places of business (“public accommodations”) will be forced to comply with this insanity under threat of the hammer of government. And restrooms and locker rooms are next. If this bothers you (and it should!) there are a few things you can do right now. City of Peabody: 978-532-3000 Call the Mayor’s office: 978-538-5702 Call the Peabody Licensing Board: 978-538-5717 Tell them NOT to force the restaurant to negotiate with men dressing as women in order to stay in business. Call the Governor’s office: 617-725-4005 Tell him to STOP supporting the radical transgender movement by giving “female” licenses to males. Mass. Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission: 617-727-3040 What is their authority for ordering restaurants to accept bizarre behaviors? Contact Capone’s with your support. Encourage them NOT to give in. And patronize them if you can! There will be more that you can do in the coming weeks. Capone’s Italian American Restaurant in Peabody — target of attacks by homosexual activists.

__________________________________________________

…Gary Glenn, president of the AFA-Michigan, also did not delay in attacking the renewed call for action by the governor. ‘Aside from once again using a Christian holiday to promote her homosexual activist allies’ political agenda, the fact is that Jennifer Granholm could have signed a comprehensive all-inclusive anti-bullying bill into law years ago that would have prohibited all bullying against all students for all reasons, period,’ Glenn said in a press release. ‘All she’s had to do — all she has to do now — is exert a little leadership and influence with her own party and political allies, and it would likely pass both houses unanimously.’”

——————————————————————————————–

MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
April 8, 2010

Granholm renews call for passage of anti-bullying legislation
Governor is open on question of enumeration vs. non-enumeration

by Todd A. Heywood

LANSING — Gov. Jennifer Granholm renewed her call for the passage of legislation which would mandate school districts create, implement and enforce policies on student bullying. The move comes on the heels of reports of the suicide of a 12-year-old girl from Michigan’s upper peninsula.

“Here in Michigan and across the nation, suicides among young people who have been subjected to bullying demonstrate the need for anti-bullying legislation,” Granholm said in a Good Friday press release. “Just last month in the Upper Peninsula, a young girl committed suicide. A contributing factor may have been alleged bullying by a classmate. Protecting young people should be and must be our number one concern.”

Granholm has long supported the legislation. She has specifically lobbied for an inclusive law which would enumerate, or list, protected groups. But, while the governor is renewing her calls for the legislation, her office backed off the stand for the comprehensive enumerated legislation.

“The legislation the governor proposed in 2006 enumerated specific reasons for which students may be bullied, but we stand ready to work with the legislature on crafting meaningful legislation that addresses this problem,” said Granholm spokeswoman Tiffany Brown.

That move is important. The legislation has been hamstrung by groups like the American Family Association of Michigan because of the enumerated, or listed, protected classes. That list includes sexual orientation and gender identity. The AFA claims passage of the legislation would be the first time Michigan law recognized either category as a protected class. That, they say, is part of a broader “homosexual agenda.”

In the lame duck session of 2008, in the wee hours of the morning, the Republican controlled Senate almost passed anti-bullying legislation. That compromise legislation stripped the enumerations out of the bill. And while this was done to appease Sen. Alan Cropsey (R-DeWitt), it was not enough; Cropsey refused to allow the bill to go to the floor for a vote and the bill died.

An attempt by Sen. Glenn Anderson (D-Westland) to attach the legislation as amendment to a bill in 2009 also failed in the Senate.

That compromise bill was approved by the Safe Schools Coalition, of which the Triangle Foundation was a part. When news of the late night backroom compromise broke, Michigan Equality a Lansing-based lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights political organization, and the Michigan Democratic LGBTA Caucus criticized the deal.

The in-fighting led to a schism. Since then, Triangle Foundation and Michigan Equality have begun a merger, and the new organization, as yet unnamed, supports the compromise legislation, though it would prefer to see the enumerated legislation adopted into law.

There are two bills pending in the state Senate. The first, introduced by Anderson, the Democratic Senator from Westland, includes enumerated protected classes. The second, introduced by Sen. Ron Jelinek (R-Three Oaks Twp.) does not include enumeration. Both lawmakers say they expect anti-bullying legislation to pass the legislature by the end of the year.

The renewed focus on the legislation by the governor was applauded by advocates.

“Triangle Foundation extends our gratitude to Gov. Granholm and we are encouraged by her renewed call for the adoption of safe schools legislation in Michigan,” said Alicia Skillman, executive director of the Detroit based lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights group. “We have lost too many children to bullying. It is our hope that the legislators will take notice and acknowledge that Michigan needs to take this crucial step to protect all students in Michigan. We would welcome the opportunity to work with school districts to assist with this much needed change.”

“I personally thank Gov. Granholm for bringing this to our legislators and communities attention,” said Kevin Epling, co-director of BullyPolice USA. The legislation, if passed, will be named after his son, Matt Epling, who committed suicide at 14 after being bullied.

“She is absolutely right that our legislators should act when they return, but will they? We’ve seen nothing but stall tactics of revisions that never materialize (or are so flimsy in content and structure that they wouldn’t pass for a High School government class assignment), demand upon demand for changes (disregarding the co-operative work that has been put into the bill, and bordering on bullying behavior itself) and false promises of support which fall short of what our children need.”

Epling’s cynicism may be on point. While Jelinek’s office has assured Michigan Messenger that meetings have been scheduled — but canceled — to arrange the timing on the anti-bullying legislation, no solid target date for passage has been set. And Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop’s office is not sounding a note of reconciliation on the issue.

In an interview Monday, Bishop Spokesperson Matt Marsden told the Michigan Information Research Service (MIRS) a subscription only news letter at the capitol, that the renewed focus was “political.”

“This is politically useful for the Governor right now,” said Marsden.

He said the Senate was focused “on other areas.”

And Gary Glenn, president of the AFA Michigan, also did not delay in attacking the renewed call for action by the governor.

“Aside from once again using a Christian holiday to promote her homosexual activist allies’ political agenda, the fact is that Jennifer Granholm could have signed a comprehensive all-inclusive anti-bullying bill into law years ago that would have prohibited all bullying against all students for all reasons, period,” Glenn said in a press release. “All she’s had to do — all she has to do now — is exert a little leadership and influence with her own party and political allies, and it would likely pass both houses unanimously.”

Glenn failed to mention the failure of the unenumerated legislation in the 2008 lame duck session.
http://michiganmessenger.com/36501/granholm-renews-call-for-passage-of-anti-bullying-legislation
__________________________________________________

——————————————————
WHTC Radio
Holland, Michigan
April 6, 2010

Baillargeon back on campaign trail

ALLEGAN, Mich. — If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

Bill Baillargeon is apparently taking that old cliché to heart. For the second time in three years, he will attempt to win in an election a court seat that he had been appointed to by Governor Granholm.

In 2007, the Saugatuck jurist was selected to the Allegan County Circuit Court bench to replace the retiring Harry Beach. Baillargeon then ran for the seat the following year, but lost by 255 votes to Kevin Cronin, in part due to negative campaigning by Campaign for Michigan Families, an arm of the Midland-based American Family Association (of Michigan), who claimed that Baillargeon was sympathetic to gay rights because of past affiliations with the Triangle Foundation and a group opposing the Michigan Marriage Protection Amendment.

Last year, Granholm tabbed Baillargeon again, this time to take over for Stephen Sheridan on the Allegan District Court bench. Yesterday, Baillargeon announced his candidacy for a full term, and at this point, there are no other challengers.

It wasn’t immediately known if the AFA, headed by noted activist Gary Glenn, will again campaign against Baillargeon.

http://www.whtc.com/news/articles/2010/apr/06/baillargeon-back-campaign-trail/
__________________________________________________

———————————–

ONE NEWS NOW
American Family Association
Tupelo, Mississippi
April 6, 2010

The truth about homosexual sex
by Marcia Segelstein, OneNewsNow Columnist

Caution: This column contains descriptions that some may find offensive.

The Centers for Disease Control recently released information from a data analysis regarding the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. Presented at the CDC’s National STD Prevention Conference, the data indicated that the rate of new HIV cases among men who have sex with men (referred to in shorthand as MSM) is over 44 times that of other men.

In an effort to look at these figures from a purely scientific and public health perspective, let’s substitute smoking and cancer for homosexual sex and HIV. If the CDC released information which made a direct correlation between smoking and extremely high rates of getting cancer, people would take notice. The media would write about it. Public health organizations would make sure the news was spread. Campaigns would be launched to save lives by discouraging smoking. Public funds would be spent to deter people from engaging in such dangerous behavior. Schools would teach children about the dangers of smoking.

Of course, as we all know, that scenario is real. Because of the now-known dangers of smoking, a warning from the Surgeon General appears on every pack of cigarettes. Public service ads saturated the airwaves over a period of years discouraging smoking. The dangers of smoking are a standard part of most health classes in schools. And it has all worked. Thirty years ago there was nothing unusual about seeing a person smoking in a restaurant, or in an office, or in a public place. Now it’s jarring to see someone lurking outside an office building, lighting up and puffing away.

There is no hiding from the CDC’s numbers when it comes to the health dangers of homosexual sex. But political correctness and fear of being accused of bias seem to have stopped everyone from stating the simple truth: that it carries serious health risks.

Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention had this to say about the findings: “While the heavy toll of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men has been long recognized, this analysis shows just how stark the health disparities are between this and other populations.”

Dr. Fenton was in no way suggesting that, considering the data, perhaps the whole notion of homosexual sex should be reconsidered or re-examined, or, heaven forbid, discouraged. On the contrary, he went on to toe the politically correct party line — i.e., that prevention is the key. “It is clear that we will not be able to stop the U.S. HIV epidemic until every affected community, along with health officials nationwide, prioritize the needs of gay and bisexual men with HIV prevention efforts.”

The CDC is focused on prevention. That sounds good, right? But if prevention efforts work, why was the number of new HIV/AIDS cases among MSM in 2005 11 percent higher than the number of cases in 2001, according to the CDC’s website? The CDC lists 1981 as the year when HIV/AIDS was first diagnosed among MSM. Nearly 30 years of prevention and education efforts touting the use of condoms and regular testing have failed to pay off, for a number of reasons.

Dr. Miriam Grossman, in her book You’re Teaching My Child What?, tells the story of Dr. Ruth Jacobs, an infectious disease specialist in Maryland, who has worked closely with AIDS patients for many years. A few years ago, at the request of a concerned parent, she reviewed a video called Protect Yourself, shown to tenth-graders in Montgomery County as part of a course called “Family Life and Human Development.” The video stated that condoms provide 98 percent protection against pregnancy and STDs, including HIV. According to Grossman, the video “implied that this nearly perfect level of protection was effective during vaginal, oral, and anal sex.”

Dr. Jacobs knew that was just plain wrong. The 98 percent figure was applicable only to pregnancy prevention, and even then, only in “perfect use” situations.

“Dr. Jacobs wanted students to hear what she told her patients – that due to anatomy and physiology, anal sex has been estimated to be at least 20 times riskier than vaginal,” Grossman writes. “Also missing was the information that condoms are more likely to fail during anal sex – a danger acknowledged on condom wrappers that warn consumers: ‘Non-vaginal use can increase potential damage to the condom.’” Despite Herculean efforts on the part of Dr. Jacobs – including the presentation of scientific research and the support of peers in the medical community – the Board of Education refused to listen. The video would remain as part of the course for tenth-graders.

Grossman doesn’t hold back on the subject of what many sex education curricula teach – and don’t teach – about anal sex, no matter what genders are involved. “The truth of biology – anal sex is too dangerous – is squelched, because it contradicts the ideology of ‘anything goes – no judgments allowed.’ …Kids are encouraged to explore their sexuality, and told precisely how; with the experts’ blessings, they go out and play in traffic….And then we wonder why, after 25 years, HIV is still going strong.”

No one wants to hear it. No one wants to say it. But the cold, hard truth is that homosexual sex is risky at best, life-threatening at worst.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=962774
__________________________________________________

March 23, 2010, marked the day a new ‘homophobic hatred’ law came into effect in England and Wales. The law has a free speech shield but could carry a sentence of up to seven years of imprisonment for those who ‘incite hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.’ Justice Minister and Deputy Women and Equality Minister Maria Eagle said the law would not prohibit expressions of religious belief but ‘cover words, behavior or material which is threatening in nature, and which is intended to stir up hatred against people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or heterosexual.’”

———————————————————–
WORLD Magazine
Asheville, North Carolina
April 5, 2010

Street illegal
American evangelist Shawn Holes was arrested
in Scotland for ‘uttering homophobic remarks’
by Alisa Harris

Shawn Holes was preaching to a crowd in Glasgow, Scotland, when same-sex couples asked the American evangelist what he thought about homosexuality. It wasn’t the first time the question had come up; in fact, he hears it asked frequently.

Holes said he answered, “Your homosexuality is the least of your problems. Your problem is your heart.” He added that homosexuality is a sin deserving of hell but that all sinners, including himself, deserve God’s wrath but are offered salvation.

Afterward, police officers arrested Holes and took him to jail—a surprise since he said his fellow preachers had just hours earlier asked an officer if it was acceptable to preach freely and to answer questions about homosexuality. The officer had told them yes.

Although the police were courteous, Holes spent the night in a damp jail cell with only a thin covering and a mat for sleeping on the hard floor. The next day he pleaded guilty to breaching the peace by “uttering homophobic remarks” that were “aggravated by religious prejudice.” The court fined him £1,000 pounds (about $1,500)—the highest fine ever levied against a street evangelist, according to Christian Institute’s Simon Calvert on Christian Premier Radio.

Holes, who has returned to the United States, said his intention was to simply answer a question: “We don’t single out people because of their sexual preferences, but certainly when they start asking questions we want to make sure they know what the Bible says about what they’re doing and what they’re practicing.”

Other Christian groups hoped that Holes would battle the charges. In fact, Colin Hart, director of The Christian Institute, said in a statement that the institute was “very disappointed” and that they were confident he would have won if he had challenged the charges. Holes stressed that his motives were “pure,” saying that he wanted to get back to his father, who is in hospice care, and to his daughter’s wedding this July. He was told it would take eight weeks or more to stand trial.

Unlikely allies have spoken up for Holes. He said that he received an email from a prominent atheist expressing support for his right to free speech. Gay rights activist Peter Tatchell called Holes a “homophobe” but condemned the fine as “an attack on free speech and a heavy-handed, excessive response to homophobia.” He affirmed Holes’ right to free speech and urged public officials to “concentrate on tackling serious homophobic hate crimes, instead of wasting public money on petty, distasteful homophobic ranters.”

Free speech is tenuous in the United Kingdom. In 2001 another U.K. street evangelist, Harry Hammond, held up a sign that said, “Jesus gives peace, Jesus is slive, stop immorality, stop homosexuality, stop lesbianism, Jesus is Lord.” An angry crowd formed as some threw dirt at Hammond and poured water on him, knocking the 69-year-old man to the ground. Hammond, however, was the one arrested and fined £300 under the Public Order Act 1986. The England and Wales High Court denied an appeal, agreeing that the sign was “insulting” and that Hammond’s conduct was “not reasonable.”

March 23, 2010, marked the day a new “homophobic hatred” law came into effect in England and Wales. The law has a free speech shield but could carry a sentence of up to seven years of imprisonment for those who “incite hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.” Justice Minister and Deputy Women and Equality Minister Maria Eagle said the law would not prohibit expressions of religious belief but “cover words, behavior or material which is threatening in nature, and which is intended to stir up hatred against people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or heterosexual.”
http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16590
__________________________________________________

(Guest Commentary)

Columnist’s disagreement is with his Maker, not Gary Glenn
by Mike Westfall, Presque Isle

In answer to Justin L. Engel’s March 26 column in The Saginaw News, “Anti-gay critic doesn’t — and shouldn’t — rattle Democratic leader:” http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2010/03/opinion_anti-gay_push_doesnt_-.html

Mr. Engel, shame on you for your biased, pro-gay piece written at the expense of American Family Association of Michigan President Gary Glenn and the hard-working Michigan families who support his work. Your article, as well as some of the twisted commentaries, are representative of the politically correct, liberal mindset of many misguided people today. Let me put you straight.

According to Scripture, the practice of homosexuality is a sin.

Gary Glenn did not write the Bible. Your confusion and disagreement, along with those who agree with you, is with your Maker, not Mr. Glenn. The American Family Association, which you choose to bash, believes America was founded upon biblical truth and that the Bible is the only inspired and infallible word of God.

Today, special interest groups are bashing Christians because the Bible will not support their lifestyle. The faith and cultural values of our nation’s foundation are under attack.

The obvious goal of these special interest groups is for America to become a Godless, hedonistic, self-indulgent, complacent place where ridiculed Christians are rendered voiceless.

So, no, Mr. Engel, I am not buying your arguments, because your conclusions are faulty. I will continue to support the AFA and Gary Glenn, who co-authored the Marriage Protection Amendment. Gary correctly states that those who support the protection of traditional marriage should be concerned with homosexual activists who have risen to the top of the Democratic Party chain.

Gary is an appreciated lightening rod for decency, a powerful man of faith and a true American hero. We thank our God for his untiring dedication, for putting the cause above himself and for the abuse he takes from people like yourself. Every American who espouses a biblical world view owes Gary Glenn a debt of gratitude. Largely because of him, traditional marriage still stands in America today.

http://www.mlive.com/opinion/saginaw/index.ssf/2010/04/columnists_disagreemnent_is_wi.html
__________________________________________________

Family group: Granholm’s Good Friday call for homosexual bullying bill “insensitive…hypocritical”

LANSING, Mich. — Gov. Jennifer Granholm, D-Michigan, drew fire Saturday from a statewide family values group for once again using the occasion of a major Christian holiday to issue a public statement promoting a political agenda pushed by homosexual activists in the state.

Gary Glenn, Midland, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, said “the third time around, we no longer believe the governor’s timing is an accident or coincidence, or even just trying to bury her promotion of the homosexual agenda in the news when people aren’t paying attention. The ongoing pattern makes it obvious that the governor believes it’s appropriate, apparently maybe even funny, to intentionally issue statements promoting homosexual activists’ political agenda in conjunction with major Christian holidays, in the face of people whose sincere religious values are offended by that agenda.”

Friday — observed worldwide as Good Friday by Christians marking the day of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and then celebrating his resurrection two days later on Easter Sunday — Granholm issued a news release criticizing the Michigan Senate for failing to pass so-called “anti-bullying” legislation demanded by homosexual activist groups.

The legislation — rather than simply prohibit all bullying against all students for all reasons, no exceptions — would instead require public schools to first segregate students into special “protected class” categories including so-called “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” then dole out protection against bullying to students who are members of one of those special protected classes.

The Michigan Information and Research Service, a Lansing state capitol news service, Friday reported Granholm’s statement and noted that “a major sticking point to anti-bullying bills in the past has been language that mandates that any local school district policy include a specific prohibition on bullying based on a child’s sexual orientation. The inclusion of this language ruffles the feathers of the social right, which fears such provisions would force all school districts to embrace gay and lesbian lifestyles.”

Glenn accused Granholm of hypocrisy and “an ongoing pattern of timing that reflects a lack of respect and sensitivity to the values of millions of Christians in Michigan.”

“Aside from once again using a Christian holiday to promote her homosexual activist allies’ political agenda, the fact is that Jennifer Granholm could have signed a comprehensive all-inclusive anti-bullying bill into law years ago that would have prohibited all bullying against all students for all reasons, period,” Glenn said. “All she’s had to do — all she has to do now — is exert a little leadership and influence with her own party and political allies, and it would likely pass both houses unanimously.”

“Instead, she has stood silently, invisibly by, apparently waiting for another Christian holiday,” Glenn said, “while Democratic lawmakers blocked that simply-stated legislation year after year, refusing to consider anything other than the demands of homosexual activists whose ulterior motive is to use legitimate concern over bullying as a Trojan Horse to create special legal rights based specifically on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.”

Glenn noted that in 2008, both state Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, and Senate Majority Floor Leader Alan Cropsey, R-Dewitt, proposed amending Democrats’ anti-bullying legislation to simply and directly prohibit all bullying against all students for all reasons, without segregating students into protected classes first as the basis of gaining such protections. Homosexual activists condemned their proposals, and Democrats in both houses refused to support them.

“That’s why it hasn’t passed, and won’t,” Glenn said. “It’s simple, governor. Drop homosexual activists’ political agenda out of the bill, directly or indirectly, and you could likely have an anti-bullying bill on your desk by the end of the month. If you don’t, it won’t be the state Senate’s fault, it’ll be because your political allies’ hidden agenda is more important to you than actually passing a bill to protect young people from bullying.”

Glenn noted the two prior occasions on which Granholm also timed the announcement of her support for policies promoted by homosexual activists with a major Christian holiday:

* In 2003, Granholm announced on Christmas Eve that she had issued an executive directive granting special “protected class” status to state employees involved in homosexual relationships. http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7-168-36898_36901-83560–,00.html

Glenn, in a guest opinion published by several state newspapers at the time, criticized the governor’s action and timing, saying she was attempting to “morally and legally equate homosexual behavior to race, ethnicity and religion. To Michigan families whose Christian faith teaches such behavior is wrong, her timing was a slap in the face.” He concluded by facetiously anticipating the timing of Granholm’s next statement promoting the homosexual agenda, saying, “No doubt she’ll announce that on Good Friday.” Glenn’s prediction finally came true seven years later.

* In 2007, the day before Thanksgiving, Granholm issued a news release announcing another new executive order by which she had established the same “protected class” status for male state employees who claim to suffer the delusion that they’re really women and demand to wear dresses to work and use the women’s restrooms, showers, and other public facilities. The Triangle Foundation, a leading homosexual activist group in the state, praised the announcement, as reported by the Associated Press on Thanksgiving Day. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312550,00.html

Glenn noted that on all three occasions on which Granholm, a professed Catholic, used a major Christian holiday as the backdrop for announcing her support for so-called “gay rights” measures, her actions were at odds with her own church’s teaching on the subject.

The Vatican in 1992, in a formal directive to bishops authored by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, stated:

“Recently, legislation has been proposed in various places which would make discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal. …Such initiatives, even where they seem more directed toward support of basic civil rights than condonement of homosexual activity or a homosexual lifestyle, may in fact have a negative impact on the family and society. …’Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder and evokes moral concern. …Including ‘homosexual orientation’ among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily bad to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights… The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality.” http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFHOMOL.HTM
__________________________________________________