2013 Favs: Massachusetts Schools Put Transgendereds in Restrooms, on Sports Teams of Their Choice

Massachusetts public schools have issued guidelines to require their public schools — get ready for this — from kindergarten to 12th grade to permit “transgendered” children to use the restroom of whatever gender the child decides they are.

In some schools, this would allow boys as old as 14 in public school bathrooms with girls as young as 5.

Now I ask you, what could possibly go wrong?

These guidelines also put school personnel in the position of raising the question with small children what gender they believe themselves to be. School personnel will be asking small children whether they are a a boy or a girl, with the concomitant implication that the teacher doesn’t know. I think that action alone, coming as it does from an authority figured and directed as it will be to very young children, has the potential to harm young children.

The new guidelines require schools to allow boys to play on girl’s athletic teams (and vice versa) if they decide that they feel like being a girl that season. I predict that once schools get over the shock, they will see that even a mediocre male athlete would be an all-star on a girl’s sports team and that all he has to do to play on that team is say he’s a girl for the duration of the season. However, instead of giving one girl’s team a winning edge over the others, this is bound to spread and soon reach the point that real girls (the ones with double x chromosomes) can no longer compete on their own teams.

The upshot of all this will almost certainly be increased sexual confusion on the part of young children and another round of the war on girls. It will make it even more difficult for parents to raise their children to be productive adults who are capable of marrying, having children of their own and raising them in stable homes.

It seems that providing a healthy environment in which we can raise children so that they can become productive and stable adults is the exact opposite of what the decision makers in our society are about. Based on their consistent actions I can only come to the conclusion that destroying our children is more in line with their goals.

As usual, all this began with a well-meaning but bad law which educators with an agenda have taken to its illogical conclusion.

I am very glad that I homeschooled my children. If it is at all possible for you to do the same, I would strongly advise you to consider it.

You can read the Massachusetts’s Public Schools Guidelines for Nondiscrimination on Gender Identity here.  The LifeSite News article describing this latest bit of educational “reform” says in part:

BOSTON, February 19, 2013, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Massachusetts Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester has issued orders to the state’s K-12 public schools requiring them to permit “transgender” boys and girls to use the opposite sex’s locker rooms, bathrooms, and changing facilities as long as they claim to identify with that gender.

Many elementary schools in smaller Massachusetts towns include children from kindergarten through eighth grade, making it possible for boys as old as 14 to share toilet facilities with girls as young as five.

Under Chester’s leadership, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) released an 11-page document on Friday outlining this and other new guidelines giving “transgender” students special status and privileges in Massachusetts schools. Some family advocates are calling the document, which was prepared with assistance from homosexual and transgender advocacy groups, “the most thorough, invasive, and radical transgender initiative ever seen on a statewide level.”

The policy does not require a doctor’s note or even parental permission for a child to switch sexes in the eyes of Massachusetts schools. Only the student’s word is needed: If a boy says he’s a girl, as far as the schools are concerned, he’s a girl.

“The responsibility for determining a student’s gender identity rests with the student,” the statement says. “A school should accept a student’s assertion of his or her gender identity when there is … ‘evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person’s core identity.’” That evidence, according to the document, can be as simple as a statement given by a friend.

That means, according to the newly issued school policies, that boys who say they identify as girls must be addressed by the feminine pronoun and be listed as girls on official transcripts.

They must also be allowed access to girls’ facilities and be allowed to play on girls’ athletic and club teams. The same is true for girls who say they are boys.

The document was issued to clarify the schools’ obligations in light of “An Act Relative to Gender Identity,” a law that went into effect last July. That bill amended Massachusetts law “to establish that no person shall be excluded from or discriminated against in admission to a public school of any town, or in obtaining the advantages, privileges and courses of study of such public school on account of gender identity.”

However, Brian Camenker, spokesman for government watchdog group MassResistance, told LifeSiteNews the DESE’s new directives go far beyond what the law requires.

Camenker pointed out that the only requirement the Gender Identity bill imposed on schools was to add “gender identity” to their non-discrimination policies, alongside other protected groups such as religious or ethnic minorities. Under the DESE’s policy, however, self-identified transgendered students will have more rights than other students, including the right to access bathroom and changing facilities of the opposite sex and play on the opposite sex’s sports teams.

Not only that, but students who object may be subject to punishment under the state’s new “anti-bullying” law, which, like the new school policy, was written with the help of homosexual and transgender activist groups.

Under that law, any outwardly negative reaction against transgenderism can now be considered bullying, and subject to discipline and punishment, according to Camenker. (Read more here.)

Christian Persecution: 6 Quick Takes from Around the Globe

This week’s 6 Quick Takes on Christian persecution around the globe include kidnappings, murders, beatings, false imprisonment and legal discrimination. 

In other words, these quick takes are the usual sad story of what Christians endure for Christ just about everywhere on this planet. Two of the stories involve legal discrimination in the “Christian” West. Both of them are instances of governments applying legal penalties for Christians who seek to practice their faith in the workplace. Ironically, they are examples of “tolerance” statutes carried to their illogical and intolerant extreme.

Every one of these stories is becoming almost cliche in today’s world. Violent persecution of Christians by government tolerated mobs occurs in places like Africa, the Middle East and India. Legal persecution by the government itself happens in totalitarian states like Viet Nam. Meanwhile, a move toward totalitarianism in which the state attempts to deprive its citizens of the rights to individual conscience and religious liberty that it has heretofore guaranteed occurs in both the UK and the USA.

Here, for your prayerful study, are the 6 Quick Takes on Christian Persecution for this week.

Union jack

1. Three U.K. Christians’ Appeals Denied by European Court on Human Rights in the Name of “Equality”

persecution.org

Jun 3rd 2013

In a display of growing secularism, the European Court on Human Rights recently rejected hearing cases of alleged discrimination against three Christian U.K. nationals. Shirley Chaplin, Gary McFarlane, and Lillian Ladele each claim to have suffered employment discrimination for expressing their faith—one having been demoted for refusing to remove a cross necklace at work, another was disciplined for refusing to conduct same-sex marriages, and the last having been fired for refusing to provide relational counseling to same-sex couples. Secularist groups praised the court’s rejection of the cases, claiming the rejection as yet another step in stopping “a small coterie of Christian activists [from] obtain[ing] special privileges for themselves”—”special privileges” like being able to sport cross necklaces and determine one’s own clients. (Read the rest here.)

Flag of Viet Nam Peoples Armysvg

2. Anti-Christian Violence in Vietnam

Anti-Christian violence is an ever-present danger for church leaders and members in Vietnam, which has been under Communist rule since 1975 and where Christians make up just 9% of the population. In just two incidents from 2012, a pastor was beaten unconscious with iron bars, suffering multiple injuries, and a woman was left with a fractured skull when a congregation was attacked as they gathered for a service; dozens of others were injured. The assaults were the work of thugs believed to have been hired by the authorities to harass and intimidate Christians.

It is striking that those injured in these incidents belonged to churches that were actually registered with the authorities. Registration is required by law and allows congregations to obtain official approval for their places of worship. But registered churches are regulated and controlled, and their legal protections are vague and uncertain. The registration process is also slow, and some applications are unsuccessful.

The position of Vietnam’s unregistered churches is even more insecure, and they are particularly vulnerable to harassment, arrests and imprisonment. In 2012 the pastor of a house church was jailed for eleven years on a charge of “disrupting national unity”.

Despite the authorities’ supposed approval of charitable work, the past year has also seen cruel attacks in the capital, Hanoi, on both a Christian orphanage and a church-run colony for leprosy patients. The children were beaten by the attackers, and the residents of the colony were terrorised by abuse and threats. (Read the rest here.)

SyrianFlag


3. Syrian bishops kidnapped in Aleppo still missing one month on


Officials say whereabouts of Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulos Yazigi remain unknown despite international efforts to secure release

Bishop Boulos Yazigi, left, and archbishop Yohanna Ibrahim were abducted by gunmen on 22 April in Aleppo, Syria. Photograph: HOPD/AP

One month after two Orthodox Christian bishops were kidnapped by gunmen in Syria, officials say they still have no idea what has happened to the missing prelates.

The clerics, the most senior church officials to be targeted since civil war engulfed the country, have not been heard of since their abduction at gunpoint in the northern city of Aleppo on 22 April.

“We are deeply worried for the lives of archbishop Mor Gregorius Yohanna Ibrahim of the Syriac Orthodox Church and bishop Boulos Yazigi of the Greek Orthodox Church,” said Katrina Lantos Swett, who chairs the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (Uscirf).

“These two religious leaders put aside their own safety by travelling to one of the worst areas of fighting to help those Syrians left with few basic necessities after more than two years of war,” she said in a statement released on Tuesday. (Read the rest here.)

American flag


4. Washington attorney general sues florist over refusal to provide flowers for same-sex wedding 

Bob Ferguson, the State of Washington’s attorney general, has announced that he is filing a consumer protection lawsuit against a florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.

“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation,” Ferguson stated in a press release. “If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their weddings, then it must provide same-sex couples the same product or service.”

Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts in Richland, Washington, explained her decision not to provide flowers for a customer’s same-sex wedding.

“He said he decided to get married, and before he got through, I grabbed his hand and said, ‘I am sorry. I can’t do your wedding because of my relationship with Jesus Christ,’” she said. “We hugged each other, and he left, and I assumed it was the end of the story.” (Read more here.)

SyrianFlag


5. MASSACRE OF CHRISTIAN VILLAGE IN SYRIA; ALMOST 40 PEOPLE KILLED

A Christian village in Syria was savagely attacked and almost 40 of its residents, including women and children, killed by opposition fighters, as UN investigators warned of increasing radicalisation among the rebels.

One of Barnabas Aid’s Syrian partners said that two of his relatives in Dweir were severely tortured by the rebels, who broke some of their bones and started to burn their bodies before shooting them in the head.    The village of Dweir on the outskirts of Homs, near the border with Lebanon, was invaded on 27 May. (Read more here.)

India flag


6. Christian Pastor and His Family Beaten in India


A pastor and his family beaten; a prayer meeting broken up; Christians forced from their village by a mob; children threatened and abused; a church building attacked and a cemetery desecrated – just a few examples of the repeated incidents of harassment and intimidation suffered by Christians in India in 2012.

In many parts of the country the small minority of Christians live at peace with the Hindu majority. But in some states they are acutely vulnerable to a militant Hindu nationalist movement called Hindutva, which is striving to make India a religiously “pure” nation. Recent years have seen numerous incidents of small-scale aggression such as those listed above, and also major outbreaks of anti-Christian communal violence in Orissa and Karnataka.

It is difficult for Christians to obtain justice for offences committed against them. Local police can be slow to respond to attacks, and often no-one is prosecuted. Corruption is also rife in the courts, and Christians’ unwillingness to play the system dishonestly works against them. Five years on from the Orissa violence, few people have been convicted. Christian leaders and human rights activists continue to campaign for justice, however, and in December 2012 twelve people were handed prison sentences for their part in the 2008 attacks.

(Read the rest here.)

The Real Housewives of the Department of Justice

Seal The document below is a copy of a Department of Justice brochure advising managers to be gay friendly.

Socially conservative commenters have been roasting this brochure while social liberal commenters and most of the media has ignored it.

After reading quite a few comments about the brochure, I decided to look it up and read it myself. I may be just getting blasé about these things, but this brochure didn’t make me angry the way it has some people. I don’t like it, but I’m not outraged by it. My basic feeling is that this is about what I’ve come to expect from the DOJ.

It is certainly a heavy-handed piece of literature. However most of the things it advises are simple courtesy, which, if they’d been put forward in a less intimidating and bizarre way probably wouldn’t offend anybody.

It would never occur to me to call people in my office by degrading names, whatever their affiliations or personal lifestyle. If that is an issue at the Department of Justice for any group of people, or, for that matter, for any individual, it needs to be addressed. However this brochure with is not the way to do it.

The problem with the brochure is that it doesn’t seem to be so much about good office practices so far as courtesy and civility are concerned as it is a vaguely threatening piece “advising” managers to take a particular position on a political/social issue. That is out of line. It’s way out of line, verging on flat-out illegal.

Before I go to the illegal stuff, I want to take a brief detour and talk about the crazy stuff.  Advising managers to turn the Department of Justice into a therapy session for LGBT people and their various problems is not only unprofessional, it is totally out of line, and … well … crazy. That is not the purpose of the DOJ. Behavior like that would destroy the work environment and create an emotional mess which was all about the various employees and their private lives instead of the work to be done.

I’m assuming that the Department of Justice does important work. I know that it’s charged with doing important work, work so important that we need employees who are eminently sane and responsible to do it.

There is no reason I can think of why a manager would be going around inviting employees to “come out” to him or her about their sexuality, or their family life or any other personal matter. That kind of behavior is not only inappropriate and invasive, it is flat-out destructive to a professional environment in the workplace.

What employees do in the privacy of their own bedrooms should stay in the privacy of their bedrooms. The workplace is not a coffee klatch.

It is also out of line — this is where it the brochure leans toward illegality — to try to coerce employees to attend gay pride events or keep gay pride literature and gay pride badges in their offices.

Gay pride new jersey It is wholly inappropriate for the DOJ to instruct managers to attend gay pride events or to encourage their subordinates to do so. This kind of behavior oversteps the bounds of the employee-employer relationship. Since these events are quasi political, it also comes perilously close to a government agency coercing its employees to advocate for political issues as a requirement of their employment. 

The brochure’s advice to “assume that LGBT employees and their allies are listening to what you’re saying … and will read what you’re writing and make sure the language you use is inclusive and respectful” is downright Orwellian. No manager should write or say personally insulting things about any employee. But the way this is worded goes beyond that advice to the world of spying and threats.

A lot of commenters appear to be upset over the advice not to use the phrase “husband and wife” in invitations to office parties (the DOJ sounds like a social club rather than the United States Department of Justice all through this memo.) I agree with these commenters. If someone is offended by the use of the phrase husband and wife, then they are denying reality.

If the DOJ wants to establish a policy that the partners of homosexual employees are to be included at occasions where spouses are also included, then they should establish that policy. There’s no reason to censor the use of language to communicate that.

This heavy-handed, vaguely threatening memo sounds like a caricature of an office memo. I notice that it’s not just a memo, it’s a designed brochure, which means the government spent quite a bit of money and talent putting it together.

What the memo seems to show us is a Department of Justice that is focused on trivialities instead of justice. It sounds like they’ve got quite a party atmosphere going there and that managers are way too involved in their employees’ private lives.

I think an office should be professional and that it should treat all its employees professionally. People form friendships at work and if they want to discuss their private lives within the framework of these friendships and they can do that without it interfering with their work, that is ok.

ComingoutoftheCloset

However, instructing managers to encourage their employees to “come out” to them about private sexual matters and to make their office environments into “safe places” for this behavior is not only unprofessional, it abrogates the purpose of the DOJ.  So far as I know the United States Department of Justice does not have intra-office psycho-babbling as part of its mandate.

This memo seems to be written for a Department of Justice that is being run like a gathering of the Real Housewives of the DOJ.

If our government employees spend their time “coming out” to one another and setting up parties, they’re wasting our money. If government employees come to work in drag or dressed in other inappropriate ways, they are not being professional and should be dismissed.

This has nothing to do with sexual preference. It has everything to do with maintaining a professional, courteous and public work environment.

Our society has gotten so touchy-feely, and so focused on empowering the nuts who reside in it that we’ve lost sight of the fact that workplaces are environments where people do work. If this is how they run the DOJ, I can tell you that I think we the people are probably being ripped off.

Pr doj lgbt directive 052113 Pr doj lgbt directive 0521132

Sex Change Surgery is the New Prefrontal Lobotomy and a Trendy Form of Child Mutilation

Http inlinethumb64 webshots com 43135 2429175020105101600S600x600Q85

What do prefrontal lobotomy and sex change surgery have in common from a scientific viewpoint?

Everything.

How are prefrontal lobotomy and sex change surgery different?

Prefrontal lobotomy was never marketed as a “right” for mentally ill people. 

Prefrontal lobotomy is one of the grand dragons from the stone knives and bear skin beds era of mental health care. Back in the bad old days, doctors had the habit of “treating” people with mental health problems (or sometimes, just behavioral problems) by sticking what was essentially an ice pick through the top of their eye socket and into their brains and swishing it around. 

The result? “Difficult” patients were ever so much nicer now that a big part of the prefrontal lobes of their brains had been disconnected. So … bingo! … doctors had a “cure.” 

Today’s prefrontal lobotomy is to “treat” physically normal, healthy people who suffer from a compulsion to mutilate themselves by cutting off their sex organs with surgery that acts out their compulsive illness and actually does remove their sex organs. The follow-up is to put a cosmetic surgery placebo version of the sex organs of their opposite sex on the wound. This plays into their mental illness rather than treats it. It also subjects them to life-long, massive doses of hormones and permanent mutilation.

Preview of  In pictures sex change operation  Xinhua | English news cn

The major difference between the two “treatments” is that sex change surgery is being promoted as a “human right” by people in the LGBT community and has been taken up as a cause by the brain-dead politically correct media. I am talking about the mutilation of physically healthy and normal people. I am not talking about treatments for people who are born with mixed genitalia. Whenever I write about this topic, I get a smattering of comments calling me a few names for having the temerity to say what is obvious to anyone with a shred of intellectual and moral honesty: This is medical malpractice. 

People who suffer from this compulsion are not the beneficiaries of this new trendy. They are its victims. They need real treatment that is based on something approaching science, not politically-motivated mutilation. 

I used this analogy in another post: If I went to a doctor and asked him/her to cut off my healthy legs and replace them with prosthesis, they would call for a psych evaluation. 

Why then do we behave as if a compulsion to cut off one’s genitals is somehow a healthy impulse?

This tawdry business of faux science enabling the mutilation of healthy people has moved into a sinister new arena. As usual, the brain dead trendies in the politically correct press are hyping it as an advance for human rights. 

The new politically correct is to mutilate children with sex change surgeries and massive doses of hormones. A shameful article in the Boston Globe, titled Led by the child who simply knew promoted this horrific form of child abuse for all it was worth. For instance, here’s the summary sell-line that tops the article:

The twin boys were identical in every way but one. Wyatt was a girl to the core, and now lives as one, with the help of a brave, loving family and a path-breaking doctor’s care.

There’s a photo of these twins below the sell line and the caption for the photo reads: “Nicole Maines, 14, her twin brother, Jonas, and their parents have traveled a long, trying road.” 

The article itself adds:

539w

… now a groundbreaking clinic at Children’s Hospital in Boston – one of the few of its kind in the world – helps families deal with the issues, both emotional and medical, that arise from having a transgender child – one who doesn’t identify with the gender he or she was born into.

The Children’s Hospital Gender Management Services Clinic can, using hormone therapies, halt puberty in transgender children, blocking the development of secondary sexual characteristics – a beard, say, or breasts – that can make the eventual transition to the other gender more difficult, painful, and costly.

Founded in 2007 by endocrinologist Norman Spack and urologist David Diamond, the clinic – known as GeMS and modeled on a Dutch program – is the first pediatric academic program in the Western Hemisphere that evaluates and treats pubescent transgenders. A handful of other pediatric centers in the United States are developing similar programs, some started by former staffers at GeMS.

It was in that clinic, under Spack’s care, that Nicole and her family finally began to have hope for her future. (Read the rest here.) 

 This fine piece of objective journalism won the GLAD Award for Outstanding Newspaper Article for 2012. The GLAD award “honors outstanding media images of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community that inspire change.”  

We have another article from the Mail Online describing how the lesbian parents of an 11-year-old boy are putting him through sex change mutilation. This poor little boy, who has started calling himself Tammy instead of Thomas, is undergoing hormone block treatment by means of a hormone suppressant that is implanted in his upper arm. The purpose of this “treatment” is “to stop him from going through puberty as a boy.” 

Psychiatrists “diagnosed” this little boy with gender identity disorder when he was seven, after he had threatened gender mutilation on himself. I guess no one thought that this might be a mental health problem and that it might, possibly, be caused by his lesbian mothers. Nope. No child abuse here. This is obviously “gender identity disorder,” and the “treatment” is to mutilate this little boy’s body, as well as his psyche. 

From the MailOnline:

Article 2043345 0E25861300000578 161 634x384


The mothers say that one of the first things Thomas told them when he learned sign language aged three – because of a speech impediment – was, ‘I am a girl’.


At age seven, after threatening genital mutilation on himself, psychiatrists diagnosed Thomas with gender identity disorder. By the age of eight, he began transitioning.


This summer, he started taking hormone-blocking drugs, which will stop him from experiencing puberty.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2043345/The-California-boy-11-undergoing-hormone-blocking-treatment.html#ixzz2StkXJila 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The two mothers, who were “married” by a rabbi in 1990, insist that their sexuality has nothing to do with this. Which, I would guess, in today’s trendy, politically correct world, settles it. 

When I was first elected for the very first time, back in the dark ages of 1980, a seasoned legislator remarked to me, “There are two groups of people that you will find you can do anything to in this place and no one will stop you: Prisoners and children.” 

Thanks to court interventions, that is no longer as true of prisoners. However, in the case of children it has grown much, much worse. We kill children with impunity right up to the moment of their birth, and sometimes afterwards, as well. We have degraded the public schools into propaganda mills for sexually disturbed people to teach their view of life to the young. We push dangerous contraceptives on young girls. We destroy our children’s homes with divorce. We commodify their lives with designer babies and then harvest the bodies of young women for eggs to keep that cycle going. 

And now, we are pushing the idea that we can submit young children to dangerous, mutilating “sex changes” because, hey, it’s politically correct and you’ll be called a few names if you object to it. 

Ok. Let the name-calling start here. 

Sex change surgery on healthy people is not treatment. It’s medical malpractice. 

Sex change on children is child abuse and child mutilation. Doctors who do it should lose their license to practice medicine and be sent to prison. Parents who push for it should lose custody of their children, and if they go forward with it, they also should be sent to prison. 

No child should be mutilated for politically correctness. 

Call me all the names you want. I don’t care. 

 

 

For further reading, check out Sex Reassignment Surgery for Children? Two Words … CHILD ABUSE

Gay Activist Dishes Up a Plateful of Truth

Masha Gessen, source Wikipedia


Masha Gessen is the author of The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin. She also writes for The New Republic, New Statesman, Slate, Vanity Fair and US News and World Report.

It made sense that she would be asked to participate in the Sydney Writer’s Festival in Sydney, Australia.

Masha Gessen is also a gay activist who has been a member of the board of directors for the Moscow LGBT organization Triangle. So it also made sense that they slotted her for a debate titled “Why Get Married When You Can Be Happy?

Evidently, Ms Gessen is not one to mince words. While other gay activists say things like what she said in that debate in private, they go the other way in public discussion.

The party line is that gay marriage is just this little thing that will have no impact on anything. Ms Gessen departed from the party line and served up a heaping plateful of unvarnished truth.

Here’s what she had to say (emphasis mine):

It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist [cheers from the audience].

That causes my brain some trouble. And part of why it causes me trouble is because fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there—because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago. I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally….

[After my divorce,] I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three…. And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality. And I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.

These statements have been all over the internet. The question is, what to they really mean?

If they had come from the mouth of a nutcase with no influence (who probably wouldn’t have been engaged in this debate in the first place) then they wouldn’t mean much of anything. Everybody’s got a mouth and most of us say really stupid things from time to time.

However, this statement didn’t come from a nutcase with no influence. It came from a writer who is entrenched in major media outlets and who writes a great deal about LGBT issues, including, presumably, gay marriage.

What that means is that Ms Gessen is not just a person with an opinion. She’s an opinion shaper. She has a lot to do with what people in the world read and thus, how they think about issues like this.

If this is the agenda she’s following, I think it’s reasonable to think that other people in these same media outlets agree with that agenda and are pushing it also. I’ve written before that I think the media is not just in support of gay marriage, it is hard-selling it to us.

I believe that writers like this one, with agendas like this, are part of that process.

Is the secret motivation behind gay marriage a plot to destroy marriage? I’m not sure that matters.

In the final analysis, it might as well be their agenda, since it will be the result of re-writing marriage laws to pretend that there are no differences between gay couples and a man and a woman. This entire movement is based on this absurd lie.

One question that people who think the way Ms Gessen says that she does don’t even try to answer is whether civilization can survive the destruction of home and family and the complete commodification of women’s bodies and of children.

This is an audio of Ms Gessen, making these statements.

YouTube Preview Image

Should Pastors Who Preach Against Gay Marriage Be Allowed to Speak at the National Day of Prayer?

 

National day of prayer logo

Should pastors who preach against gay marriage be allowed to speak at the National Day of Prayer?

I have never attended the National Day of Prayer services here in Oklahoma. I can’t pray in public. When I have to stand for public prayer — as I often do — I don’t feel God. All I hear is the echo chamber of my own thoughts. A lot of times, if the matter is grave, I pray my own private prayer while the public prayer runs as background noise. The National Day of Prayer just isn’t my cup of tea. 

National day of prayer tulsa oklahoma

National Day of Prayer, Tulsa, OK

I never gave the National Day of Prayer much thought until atheist cranks started trying to make it illegal. Then I realized that while I don’t attend because it’s not my personal religious flavor, I do think that it’s up to Congress, and not a smattering of nobody-can-do-anything-I-don’t-agree-with zealots whether such an event should happen. 

So, if the topic is the National Day of Prayer, my reaction is going to be along the direction that those who want to have this day can have it rather than anything based on my personal plans to participate. I don’t intend to change my plans for this year’s National Day of Prayer. I won’t attend the event. However, if the cranks keep on cranking, I may change my mind and show up next year, not for prayer so much as for solidarity with my Christian brothers and sisters.

Once again, the war is being forced upon us.

Natl day of prayer at bombing memorial

National Day of Prayer at Oklahoma City Bombing memorial

This year’s National Day of Prayer is receiving flak from a new quarter. Rather than just the usual atheist crankery aimed at driving Christianity from the public square, we now have the LGBTQ crowd. They don’t want to end the event. They want to chose who leads it.

Nationaldayofprayer ok capitol

Small group prays after official Day of Prayer ceremony, Oklahoma State Capitol 

The Human Rights Campaign is seeking to stop participation by a pastor who has preached against gay marriage, or, as they call it, “equality.” They are asking that Pastor Greg Laurie not be allowed to lead the event.

So, the question arises: Should pastors who preach against gay marriage be allowed to speak at the National Day of Prayer? 

As nutty as it sounds, the Human Rights Campaign, seems to say no. 

Their reason is that he says things like this:

“Sin is sin,” he said during the Thursday night Bible study at Harvest Orange County in Southern California.

Laurie addressed the “hot-button” issues of homosexuality and marriage while preaching on the fifth commandment of honoring one’s father and mother.

“It doesn’t say honor your mother and mother as in two women married, or honor your father and your father, or honor your mother and her live-in lover,” he said.

“God established the family … He and He alone defines the family. Maybe that’s why Satan hates the family so much and has effectively declared war on it because God loves the family.

“Tamper with God’s formula, if you will, at our own peril.”

Like many pastors who have spoken on the issue of marriage, Laurie said the issue is not political, but rather moral and biblical. (Read the rest here.)

I do not understand why gay people seem to be so blind to the fact that the same rights which allow them to promote their cause belong to everyone.

Oklahoma atheists

Demonstration at Oklahoma State Capitol 

Some leaders in gay rights organizations seem committed to a program of harassment and hazing of anyone who disagrees with them. At the same time, they appear to be equally committed to creating a world where those who refuse to participate in gay marriages will lose their jobs and have their businesses closed down.

Now it appears they want to make sure that those who speak against gay marriage are locked out of public events. 

The question remains: Should pastors who preach against gay marriage be allowed to speak at the National Day of Prayer? 

From C.P. US:

Homosexual activists are labeling evangelist Greg Laurie as the “anti-gay California pastor” and are asking government officials to rescind Laurie’s invitation to lead National Day of Prayer-related events in Washington, D.C. as the event’s honorary chairman.

The Human Rights Campaign, the largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) advocacy group in America, contends that Laurie has a history of speaking out against LGBT Americans. And OutServe-SLDN, an association of actively serving LGBT military personnel, is calling on the Pentagon to remove the pastor from the agenda, citing “his blatantly anti-LGBT message.”

“Pastor Laurie’s message is out of step with what the majority of people of faith across this country believe,” said Dr. Sharon Groves, director of HRC’s Religion & Faith Program.

“In greater numbers than ever before, people of faith are feeling compelled to speak up and organize for equality – because of their faith.” (Read the rest here.) 


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X