March 7, 2013
Please keep AFA-Michigan’s work in your prayers…
Today, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a reply brief in the U.S. Supreme Court…which asks the high court to review an appellate court decision which held that several Michigan pastors and a family values advocate lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of the controversial federal â€œMatthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.â€ …The Supreme Court Justices are scheduled to hold a conference on March 15, 2013, to determine whether to grant the petition.Â
The â€œHate Crimes Act,â€ which was signed into law by President Obama in October 2009, criminalizes so-called â€œbiasâ€ crimes motivated by a personâ€™s â€œactual or perceivedâ€ â€œsexual orientationâ€ or â€œgender identity.â€Â Violators of the Act are subject to ten years in prison.
In February 2010, Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, and Michigan-based pastors Levon Yuille, Rene Ouellette, and James Combs filed a federal lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, challenging the Actâ€™s constitutionality.
Read remainder of story:Â http://www.americanfreedomlawcenter.org/home/77/aflc-files-brief-in-support-of-its-petition-for-supreme-court-review-of-federal-hate-crimes-law.html.Â
April 4, 2012
AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn Tuesday night was part of a public forum — sponsored by Delta College in Saginaw — on whether taxpayers should be forced to pay for providing spousal-type employment benefits to the unmarried “partners” of state and local government employees.
As is typically the case, the panel included three members — a Delta College professor, an ACLU lawyer, and a Delta College lawyer — who favored taxpayer-subsidized benefits for homosexual and other “partners” of government employees, plus a supposedly “neutral” moderator, another Delta professor who couldn’t resist making clear his support for such policies.
Gary told the audience and news media: “At a time when over 800,000 people in Michigan have lost their private sector jobs over the last decade, and that many or more have had their pay or hours cut back, there’s not public support for another expansion of government employee benefits, regardless of the supposed justification.”
Glenn also noted that Michigan voters overwhelmingly voted in favor of the state’s Marriage Protection Amendment, meaning the state cannot extend benefits on the basis of recognizing homosexual or other unmarried relationships as being equal or similar to marriage between a man and a woman.
December 2, 2011
FRCBlog.com– “Ann Haas, research director for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, asked, ‘What if the way weâ€™re talking about these suicides could actually be encouraging vulnerable young people to copycat the tragic behavior?’
A year later, a commentary last month on the website of The Advocate, the nationâ€™s leading ‘gay’ magazine, finally admitted that this is a serious problem. David McFarland……(who) runs a suicide prevention hotline for (homosexual) youth…cited the political and cultural ‘benefit from showcasing the health crisis of disproportionate rates of suicide and incidences of bullying that affect (homosexual) young people.’ Howeverâ€”in an astonishing admissionâ€”he also acknowledged that ‘this tactic has also increased suicide risk.’
Got that? Here is a pro-homosexual activist admitting that ‘this tactic’ (‘showcasing . . . suicide and . . . bullying’) ‘has also increased suicide risk.'”
November 30, 2011
CITY PULSE– “Tuesday, the (Michigan) Senate passed nearly unanimously a different version of an anti-bullying bill…sending it to Gov. Rick Snyderâ€™s desk for final approval. …For leaders of Michiganâ€™s gay community, though, the bill falls short of what they sought: Specific protection for Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender individuals and those who are perceived as gay. They say the measure remains but one example of how this Legislature refuses to include protections in state law for LGBT individuals.”
November 28, 2011
DETROIT NEWS — “Some conservatives object specifically to the enumeration of gay, lesbian and transgender students. Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan…has called inclusion of such students in the bill a ‘Trojan horse.’
‘We are concerned that if you establish special protected class status expressly on the basis of homosexual behavior, that will be used to promote such behavior,’ said Glenn, who was co-sponsor of the ‘marriage protection’ amendment approved by state voters in 2004.
Glenn noted Iowa enumerated protected groups â€” including gay, lesbian and transgender students â€” in its anti-bullying law, and the Iowa Supreme Court used that as evidence of protected class status when it upheld gay marriage in that state.”
November 8, 2011
WND COMMENTARY: â€œAll over the country, parents are discovering that â€œanti-bullyingâ€ programs are a carte blanche for sexual-deviance promotion. Kids learn that unless they nod approvingly at homosexuality and gender-bending, they are all complicit in the worst damage that can ever happen to a fellow student.â€
Thanks to your support, AFA-Michigan’s firm opposition over the last five years has succeeded in stopping Michigan’s pending anti-bullying bill from being used as a Trojan Horse for homosexual activists’ political agenda. Make a tax-deductible contribution to AFA-Michigan today.
November 4, 2011
WLNS-TV CHANNEL 6 — “A Senate-passed anti-bullying bill) makes exceptions for ‘statements of religious belief’ or ‘moral conviction.’ ‘It really in a nutshell gives somebody the right to reach out and hurt somebody and then claim, it was against my religious beliefs so…,’ said (anti-bullying activist Kevin) Epling. ‘Right now if a child doesn’t have strong religious beliefs, he’s gonna be picked on by kids who do have strong religious beliefs, and it’s gonna be perfectly okay for them to do that,’ said Epling.
Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan, says that’s simply not true. ‘It would be an absurd characterization to say that in any way encouraged or allowed bullying,’ said Glenn. ‘It was inserted to make sure that no student is bullied because they simply express their opinions. There is no language in it that even approaches such a ridiculous charge. It equally protects all students from all bullying for all reasons,’ said Glenn.”
November 3, 2011
BETWEEN THE LINES — “Ultimately, the ACLU of Michigan Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Project plans to eliminate the constitutional amendment that currently bans same-sex marriage or similar unions in Michigan.
In the interim, they strive to work to amend Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act to include protection against discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation based… on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression; push for the enactment of anti-bullying legislation that protects LGBT youth; advocate for the full legal rights of same-sex couples to parent; protect state laws that provide confidentiality of HIV status; and support policies to respect the relationships of LGBT seniors.”
November 3, 2011
Brandon’s characterization of the legislation is ridiculously wrong. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite of what he reports.
The bill’s language reaffirming First Amendment-guaranteed free speech rights was inserted specifically to ensure that students are not bullied, or accused of bullying, merely because they exercise their freedom to verbally make statements of religious or moral conviction.
It was likely in response to the Howell High student who last year was ejected from class — by a teacher wearing an anti-bullying t-shirt — because the student dared say that he does not accept homosexual behavior because it violates his religious convictions. The teacher was later reprimanded and suspended for a day for violating the student’s Constitutional rights.
Even Jay Kaplan of ACLU-Michigan agreed that the student’s comments were Constitutionally guaranteed, telling the Associated Press: “We believe, based on those statements — as offensive and upsetting as they were — they were protected speech.”
In other words, a student’s free speech rights cannot be legally censored or muzzled just because someone else who hears his opinion chooses to be offended or upset.
Further, the 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in 2001 unanimously overturned a high school speech code that attempted to ban expressions of opinion just because others find the opinion offensive. Now Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito wrote:
“No court or legislature has ever suggested that unwelcome speech directed at another’s ‘values’ may be prohibited under the rubric of anti-discrimination. By prohibiting disparaging speech directed at a person’s ‘values,’ the policy strikes at the heart of moral and political discourse — the lifeblood of constitutional self-government (and democratic education) and the core concern of the First Amendment. That speech about ‘values’ may offend is not cause for its prohibition.”
Please note that the bill’s language says that verbal “statements” of religious or moral conviction do not constitute bullying. Free speech protections do just that, protect free speech, not physical acts of bullying.
Click here to read the column
November 2, 2011
RECORD-EAGLE — “A campaign group that supports Traverse City’s non-discrimination ordinance raised about four times as much money as its opponents. (Homosexual activist group) Traverse City Equality generated more than $25,853 in campaign contributions in its effort to urge a ‘yes’ vote on the Nov. 8 city ballot Proposal 1. A ‘yes’ vote would keep intact a city ordinance that prohibits housing a…nd employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. …Its largest contributor, and the largest donor on either side of the issue, is Washington, D.C.-based National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund. The fund gave $10,000 to Traverse City Equality.
The group No Special Rights Discrimination, which opposes the measure, raised $6,459 thus far, according to documents filed with the Grand Traverse County clerk.”