Please note that despite the opposition of top military leaders, every Democratic member of Michigan’s Congressional delegation voted in favor of changing federal law to force the U.S. military to enlist individuals openly involved in homosexual behavior, while every Republican congressman from Michigan voted against the bill. Michigan’s two Democratic U.S. senators and President Obama also support the bill.

This Memorial Day, please join AFA-Michigan in praying that the Lord will intervene to stop this assault on the integrity, morale, and combat readiness of our armed forces in a time of war, and thus on our national security itself.
We deeply appreciate your support.

Salute!

_____________

“Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan, who also served in the Army, …says, ‘Serving our nation in the military is not a right. It is a privilege, and it is simply outrageous that these politicians, many who have never worn the uniform, would vote to force the brave men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line to defend our country, to integrate and live and share showers and living facilities with people who are involved openly in homosexual behavior.’

Glenn says there are health risks that heterosexual service members should not be subjected to. ‘We think it should return to a situation in which homosexual conduct prohibits service in the U.S. military out of respect for the men and women willing to put their lives on the line for us.’”

Watch video: http://www.connectmidmichigan.com/news/story.aspx?id=463696

—————————————————————-

WEYI-TV
NBC Channel 25
Flint, Michigan
May 28, 2010

House votes to repeal ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’
by Dan Armstrong

The U.S. House of Representatives approves a measure to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military. The effort to repeal the policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is being spearheaded by Michigan Senator Carl Levin.

NBC25 spoke with those who support it and those who oppose it.

Michigan Senator Carl Levin says, “The policy should end.” Levin says the current policy discriminates.

Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays in Genesee County, also known as PFLAG, supports the House’s decision. The president of Genesee County PFLAG, Terri Dinsmore, says “This is a good first step into repealing that act.” However, Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan, who served in the army, disagrees.

Glenn says, “Serving our nation in the military is not a right. It is a privilege, and it is simply outrageous that these politicians, many who have never worn a uniform, would vote to force the brave men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line to defend our country, to integrate, and live, and share showers and living facilities with people who are involved openly in homosexual behavior.”

Glenn says there are health risks that heterosexual service members should not be subjected to. “We think it should return to a situation in which homosexual conduct prohibits service in the U.S. military out of respect for the men and women who willing to put their lives on the line for us.”

Supporters say, it’s an issue of fair treatment. Dinsmore says, “It is an equal rights thing. Nobody should have to hide who they are.”

To become law, the senate would have to pass a measure and have presidential approval.

Those who support the measure would also have to show there would be no adverse effects.
Opponents say, it would affect the military’s cohesiveness, readiness, and recruitment procedures.

http://www.connectmidmichigan.com/news/story.aspx?id=463696
__________________________________________________

“Funk also attacked Brad Zaun for his vote in favor of the anti-bullying bill while in the (Iowa) State Senate. The bullying bill specifically protected gays, lesbians, and transgendered people from being bullied in school. Most Republicans didn’t support the bill because it carved out special rights for people based on behavior. The bullying bill that Zaun supported was cited by the Iowa Supreme Court when it issued its ruling in Varnum vs. Brien, which allowed gay marriages to occur in Iowa.”

http://theiowarepublican.com/home/2010/05/18/funk-gets-aggressive-in-tea-party-debate
__________________________________________________

…A bill that sought to address bullying in Michigan died in 2008 in the state Senate because senators could not agree on whether to enumerate the categories of victims. A new, non-enumerated version of the bill this year passed the state House on May 12, and now heads back to the Senate. The right-wing American Family Association (AFA) has been actively opposing language that defines bullying as ‘reasonably perceived to be motivated by animus or by an actual or perceived characteristic.’ In an action alert to supporters in early May, the AFA said the Michigan bill would make bullying a ‘thought crime’ and would still define it as ‘motivated by a student’s ’characteristics,’ including homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.’

…But one of the most high-profile national groups pushing for laws to address the problem of bullying, ‘Bully Police,’ is also one of the key opponents of enumeration. Brenda High, founder of Bully Police, told the New York Daily News in March that she believes that state’s legislature has repeatedly failed to pass an anti-bullying law because the bill includes language that gives ‘special protection’ to gay children and those with special needs. On its Web site (bullypolice.org), Bully Police explains, ‘Defining victims will slow the process of lawmaking, dividing political parties who will argue over which victims get special rights over other victims. …All children who are bullied are victimized and they ALL need to be protected.’ High founded the group after she lost her son Jared to a bullying-related suicide in 1998. …(High said,) ‘We must teach our children Christian values and ask our schools to teach ’do unto others’ values so that all of our children can have a safe and bully-free environment to learn.’”

—————————————————————————

BAY WINDOWS
“New England’s largest GLBT newspaper”
(homosexual activist newsweekly)
Boston, Massachusetts
May 20, 2010

Anti-bullying measures advance against obstacles
Pressure to include LGBT students builds
by Dana Rudolph

http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=105946
__________________________________________________

In response to our statement below, AFA-Michigan received a call Thursday evening from Brenda High, founder of BullyPolice.org, the national organization which lists Michigan anti-bullying activist Kevin Epling as (along with Brenda) one if its two national co-directors. http://www.bullypolice.org/

Brenda told us that we may report that as founder of BullyPolice.org, she agrees with AFA-Michigan’s position that the language in House Bill 4580 which defines bullying as being “motivated by animus or by a (student’s) actual or perceived characteristic(s)” should be removed from the legislation, since it attempts to define victims rather than simply prohibiting all bullying against all students for all reasons, regardless of the motivation in any given instance. HB 4580 passed the Michigan House last week but is unlikely to be supported as written by the state Senate.

Gary Glenn, President
American Family Association of Michigan

AMERICAN FAMILY
ASSOCIATION OF
MICHIGAN

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, May 20, 2010

Gary Glenn, Midland, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, issued the following statement in response to a Boston newspaper’s report Thursday on anti-bullying legislation, including the revelation that a major national anti-bullying organization — which lists anti-bullying activist Kevin Epling as one of two co-directors — agrees with AFA-Michigan’s longstanding opposition to wording in Michigan anti-bullying bills that attempts to “define victims” based on “characteristics.” (See Bay Windows article: http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=105946)

——

For years, Kevin Epling has endorsed homosexual activists’ Trojan Horse legislative strategy regarding state anti-bullying legislation, despite being an officer of a national anti-bullying organization that we now learn agrees with AFA-Michigan, specifically urging parents not to support legislation that attempts to define victims based on their looks or other characteristics such as engaging in homosexual behavior or cross-dressing.

Specifically, Mr. Epling has long lent his name and tragic personal experience in support of homosexual activists’ demand that anti-bullying legislation must segregate students into enumerated “protected class” categories based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” despite being listed as an officer of a national organization which a homosexual activist newspaper in Boston Thursday identified as “one of the most high-profile national groups pushing for (such) laws” but also “one of the key opponents of enumeration.” (Notably, only eight states have anti-bullying laws that include the “enumeration” endorsed by Mr. Epling here in Michigan.) http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=105946

BullyPolice.org, which on its home page identifies Mr. Epling as one of its two national co-directors, warns:

“There should not be any major emphasis on defining victims. This addition into an anti-bullying law will cause several problems for lawmakers: …The way a bully’s target or victim acts or physically looks is not the victim’s problem… Defining victims will slow the process of lawmaking, dividing political parties who will argue over which victims get special rights over other victims. All children deserve the ‘special right’ not to be bullied. All children who are bullied need to be protected.”

(See full statement by BullyPolice.org founder, co-director, and executive director Brenda High below)

Having rejected the position of his own national organization, and done exactly the opposite of what BullyPolice.org counsels, Mr. Epling’s efforts in the Michigan legislature have produced precisely the results the organization predicts.

Yet he continues to lend his name and support to legislation — recently passed by the state House of Representatives — which despite retreating on the issue of specifically enumerating “protected classes,” still insists on attempting to define victims based on a victim’s “actual or perceived characteristic(s).” We’re told by reliable sources that such language, as in past years, will not be supported by the state Senate.

When Mr. Epling decides to take a position consistent with the organization he co-directs, rather than continue to endorse language demanded by homosexual activists and their political allies, he will find a major obstacle to passage of an anti-bullying bill — the very obstacle his own organization warns against — removed. (Other obstacles may remain; for example, the Lansing State Journal and Grand Rapids Press have both editorialized against such legislation, calling it an unnecessary legislative intrusion into an issue better handled by local parents, teachers, school boards, and law enforcement.)

Nonetheless, we urge Mr. Epling to join AFA-Michigan — and, more to the point, his own organization, BullyPolice.org — in opposing legislative language that attempts to “define victims,” in the current case based on the victim’s “actual or perceived characteristic(s).”

If that single line is removed from the House-passed bill, AFA-Michigan will, as we’ve long said, no longer oppose it.

As a parent of three teenagers, I greatly sympathize with Mr. Epling’s unimaginable loss of his son. In years past, I’ve discussed with him my belief that his endorsement alone would legitimize anti-bullying legislation that might actually pass, by simply protecting all students from all bullying without regard to personal characteristics, even if homosexual activists don’t like it. He refused. And as long as Mr. Epling continues to reject his own organization’s position and counsel, he himself will remain a prominent part of the reason no such legislation has reached the governor’s desk.

———————————————————————————-

BULLYPOLICE.ORG
Co-Directors: Brenda High, Kevin Epling

MAKING THE GRADE
How states are “graded” on their anti-bullying laws

by Brenda High, Executive Director

…3. There must be definitions of bullying and harassment.

Defining the problem is the key to solving the problem.

There should not be any major emphasis on defining victims. This addition into an anti-bullying law will cause several problems for lawmakers:

* Any child can be victimized by a bully. Remember that bullies bully because they can, and because they can get away with it.

* The way a bully’s target or victim acts or physically looks is not the victim’s problem but the bully’s own psychological problem. The bully is the root of the problem.

* Defining victims will slow the process of lawmaking, dividing political parties who will argue over which victims get special rights over other victims.

All children deserve the “special right” not to be bullied. ALL children who are bullied need to be protected.

http://www.bullypolice.org/grade.html
__________________________________________________

If all bullying against all students for all reasons is prohibited, what difference does it make what a bully was thinking, feeling, or motivated by in any particular instance of bullying?

Please read today’s Associated Press story below, then please contact your state senator — http://senate.michigan.gov/SenatorInfo/find-your-senator.htm — and urge him to join AFA-Michigan and BullyPolice.org in opposing the thought-crime language in House Bill 4580.

Thanks as always for your support!

————–

“Michigan’s (anti-bullying) legislation remains unfinished, tangled in a web of competing interests — including both sides of the gay rights debate…partly because of a single line in the three-page bill that some interpret as opening the door for gay rights activists to try and carve out special protections. The bill…says that bullying includes but is not limited to conduct that is ‘reasonably perceived to be motivated by animus or by an actual or perceived characteristic.’ Even anti-bullying groups have internal disagreements over whether that line should be included in the legislation.

…Alicia Skillman of (the homosexual activist group) Equality Michigan said the legislation’s goal is to protect all Michigan students from bullying. If that’s the case, conservatives say, lawmakers should drop the line about animus and perceived characteristics. ‘We’ve said from the beginning we will not oppose a bill that simply prohibits all bullying against all students for all reasons,” said Gary Glenn, president of the Midland-based American Family Association of Michigan.”

——————————————

CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Chicago, Illinois
May 22, 2010

Anti-bullying plan delayed by competing interests

by Tim Martin, The Associated Press

LANSING, Mich. — Since Kevin Epling’s 14-year-old son killed himself after a hazing incident, he has been trying to get schools to take bullying more seriously.

As part of that effort, he’s pushing Michigan lawmakers to pass a law requiring schools to have anti-bullying policies. While legislation has been introduced often in the past decade, it’s still not law — frustrating Epling and others who say it’s needed to send a strong message about changing a culture that too often permits students to harass each other.

Forty-three states have adopted anti-bullying laws, many of them in the past decade. But Michigan’s legislation remains unfinished, tangled in a web of competing interests — including both sides of the gay rights debate and politicians with both liberal and conservative leanings.

“Our biggest problem with anti-bullying in our schools is not our kids. It’s our adults,” said Epling, an East Lansing resident and a co-director of BullyPolice USA. “Our biggest problem is our adults who don’t want to tackle this issue because it’s hard work.”

Michigan’s law would be named after Matt Epling, who died in 2002.

The Democrat-run state House passed a version of the anti-bullying bill earlier this month by a 76-29 vote, the broadest support yet for the legislation. A similar bill has been introduced in the Republican-led state Senate, with the backing of some GOP members.

But the measure also has opposition in the Senate and its future is uncertain — partly because of a single line in the three-page bill that some interpret as opening the door for gay rights activists to try and carve out special protections.

The bill defines bullying or harassment as abuse of one student by another in any form. It also says that bullying includes but is not limited to conduct that is “reasonably perceived to be motivated by animus or by an actual or perceived characteristic.”

Even anti-bullying groups have internal disagreements over whether that line should be included in the legislation.

Gay rights groups see the latest Michigan proposal as a compromise. Some previous Michigan anti-bullying proposals had included language to prohibit harassment of students with specific characteristics — including sexual orientation, weight, religion and race.

That language has been dropped in the current version, despite the objections of some Democrats.

Equality Michigan, a gay rights group, would prefer stronger language but supports the House-passed version with the “perceived characteristic” wording. The bill would allow local school districts to craft their own policies, and gay rights groups — along with other organizations and parents — could work at the local level to get language in those policies more specifically addressing their concerns.

Alicia Skillman of Equality Michigan said the legislation’s goal is to protect all Michigan students from bullying.

If that’s the case, conservatives say, lawmakers should drop the line about animus and perceived characteristics.

“We’ve said from the beginning we will not oppose a bill that simply prohibits all bullying against all students for all reasons,” said Gary Glenn, president of the Midland-based American Family Association of Michigan.

Republican Sen. Alan Cropsey of DeWitt said he has concerns about the “perceived characteristic” language, but said that’s not his primary problem with the bill. He questions whether a state mandate, as it’s now proposed, would make any difference in the fight against bullying.

Parents in states with anti-bullying laws still have concerns that schools don’t do enough to address harassment. Critics of the legislation say most Michigan school districts already have some sort of policy related to bullying, some following a model policy established by the State Board of Education in 2006.

The House-passed bill mandates policies but lacks requirements for what they must contain. The bill “encourages” schools to include provisions for investigating reports of bullying, along with education and intervention measures.

“Passing a piece of paper and calling it a law does not do anything,” Cropsey said.

Other lawmakers have said the bills would be another unfunded mandate for cash-strapped schools, forcing them to come up with policies and investigate bullying complaints with no additional money for the work. Some say the state should not meddle in a situation best handled by local schools.

Supporters say lawmakers should stop making excuses and pass a law that would provide a renewed emphasis on anti-bullying policies in schools.

“I’d like to see a little more in it,” said Democratic Rep. Pam Byrnes of Washtenaw County’s Lyndon Township, sponsor of the House legislation. “But there are too many different competing interests here, so we have to move something forward. We are one of seven states without legislation, and it’s embarrassing.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-mi-schoolbullying,0,2706701.story

———————————————————————–

LENGTHY EFFORT: Michigan lawmakers have introduced bills to mandate anti-bullying policies in public schools for the better part of a decade, but none of them has become law. Most states already have similar laws.

STATUS REPORT: Anti-bullying legislation passed the Democrat-run state House this month. It’s pending in the Republican-run Senate with an uncertain future.

PRO AND CON: Supporters say Michigan needs the law to force schools to do more to combat bullying of students. Some opponents say the bill won’t be effective. Others argue it’s an attempt by gay rights activists and others to carve out special protections.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-mi-schoolbullying-su,0,5420212.story
__________________________________________________

DNA determines the truth of our identity
by Gerald E. Evans

Scientists are proving the theory of a design of all things by including the use of Quantum Algebra to theorize the age of our universe and earth to be six to ten thousand years old, using the Second Law of Thermal Dynamics.

Every living thing known to man contains DNA that is the instruction book used to form all known forms of life.

DNA in mammals determines size, color of eyes, skin and hair, the number, size and location of appendages such as fingers, toes, ears and other organs that determine sex.

Law enforcement uses DNA to determine the ethnicity and sex of decomposed bodies during identification and can even determine lineage, or family connection, as witnessed when the World War II Unknown Soldier — buried in Arlington Cemetery — was identified and his remains returned to his family.

Psychiatry claims that Gender Confusion Syndrome is a mental illness that can be treated, and in some cases cured, but regardless of what we think our gender is, it is our DNA that is the final determinate that decides if we are male or female. It is not a culture, a body mutilation, a defective mind, or a desire to be what we want no matter who we offend, inconvenience, or how we negatively affect the lives and livelihoods of others.

In a free society, we all enjoy our liberties as long as our liberties don’t interfere with or restrict the liberties of those around us by ignoring or refusing to accept responsibility for our actions.

Gerald E. Evans of Ellsworth is a long-time supporter of the American Family Association of Michigan.
__________________________________________________

…The Public Order Act, which outlaws the unreasonable use of abusive language likely to cause distress, has been used to arrest religious people in a number of similar cases. Harry Hammond, a pensioner, was convicted under Section 5 of the Act in 2002 for holding up a sign saying ‘Stop immorality. Stop Homosexuality. Stop Lesbianism. Jesus is Lord.’ while preaching in Bournemouth. Stephen Green, a Christian campaigner, was arrested and charged in 2006 for handing out religious leaflets at a Gay Pride festival in Cardiff.”

————————————-

DAILY TELEGRAPH
London, England
May 2, 2010

Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin

A Christian street preacher was arrested and locked in a cell for
telling a passer-by that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God.

by Heidi Blake

Dale McAlpine was charged with causing “harassment, alarm or distress” after a homosexual police community support officer (PCSO) overheard him reciting a number of “sins” referred to in the Bible, including blasphemy, drunkenness and same sex relationships.

The 42-year-old Baptist, who has preached Christianity in Wokington, Cumbria for years, said he did not mention homosexuality while delivering a sermon from the top of a stepladder, but admitted telling a passing shopper that he believed it went against the word of God.
Police officers are alleging that he made the remark in a voice loud enough to be overheard by others and have charged him with using abusive or insulting language, contrary to the Public Order Act.

Mr McAlpine, who was taken to the police station in the back of a marked van and locked in a cell for seven hours on April 20, said the incident was among the worst experiences of his life.

“I felt deeply shocked and humiliated that I had been arrested in my own town and treated like a common criminal in front of people I know,” he said.

“My freedom was taken away on the hearsay of someone who disliked what I said, and I was charged under a law that doesn’t apply.”

Christian campaigners have expressed alarm that the Public Order Act, introduced in 1986 to tackle violent rioters and football hooligans, is being used to curb religious free speech.

Sam Webster, a solicitor-advocate for the Christian Institute, which is supporting Mr McAlpine, said it is not a crime to express the belief that homosexual conduct is a sin.

“The police have a duty to maintain public order but they also have a duty to defend the lawful free speech of citizens,” he said.

“Case law has ruled that the orthodox Christian belief that homosexual conduct is sinful is a belief worthy of respect in a democratic society.”

Mr McAlpine was handing out leaflets explaining the Ten Commandments or offering a “ticket to heaven” with a church colleague on April 20, when a woman came up and engaged him in a debate about his faith.

During the exchange, he says he quietly listed homosexuality among a number of sins referred to in 1 Corinthians, including blasphemy, fornication, adultery and drunkenness.

After the woman walked away, she was approached by a PCSO who spoke with her briefly and then walked over to Mr McAlpine and told him a complaint had been made, and that he could be arrested for using racist or homophobic language.

The street preacher said he told the PCSO: “I am not homophobic but sometimes I do say that the Bible says homosexuality is a crime against the Creator”.

He claims that the PCSO then said he was homosexual and identified himself as the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender liaison officer for Cumbria police. Mr McAlpine replied: “It’s still a sin.”

The preacher then began a 20 minute sermon, in which he says he mentioned drunkenness and adultery, but not homosexuality. Three regular uniformed police officers arrived during the address, arrested Mr McAlpine and put him in the back of a police van.

At the station, he was told to empty his pockets and his mobile telephone, belt and shoes were confiscated. Police took fingerprints, a palm print, a retina scan and a DNA swab.

He was later interviewed, charged under Sections 5 (1) and (6) of the Public Order Act and released on bail on the condition that he did not preach in public.

Mr McAlpine pleaded not guilty at a preliminary hearing on Friday at Wokingham magistrates court and is now awaiting a trial date.

The Public Order Act, which outlaws the unreasonable use of abusive language likely to cause distress, has been used to arrest religious people in a number of similar cases.

Harry Hammond, a pensioner, was convicted under Section 5 of the Act in 2002 for holding up a sign saying “Stop immorality. Stop Homosexuality. Stop Lesbianism. Jesus is Lord” while preaching in Bournemouth.

Stephen Green, a Christian campaigner, was arrested and charged in 2006 for handing out religious leaflets at a Gay Pride festival in Cardiff. The case against him was later dropped.

Cumbria police said last night that no one was available to comment on Mr McAlpine’s case.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7668448/Christian-preacher-arrested-for-saying-homosexuality-is-a-sin.html
__________________________________________________