Recent Posts

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

Amen to this--let us be adults, please

More SPUC news

US Agency for International Development linked to forced sterilisation camps in India


Tuesday, 27 January 2015

US Agency for International Development linked to forced sterilisation camps in India teaching


Fiorella Nash, an SPUC political researcher, has sent me the following harrowing report:
The Population Research Institute (PRI) has published a damning report exposing India’s forced sterilisation camps. In the name of reaching family planning quotas, women in the most populous parts of India have been sterilised in filthy and dangerous conditions. Cases reported by PRI include:
  • Doctors using bicycle pumps to inflate women’s wombs
  • Repeated use of unsterilized needles and other equipment
  • Operations performed without adequate anaesthesia
  • Old school buildings lacking electricity and running water used as operating theatres
  • Little or no aftercare
  • Antibiotics contaminated with rat poison
  • One doctor performing over 80 operations in a couple of hours.
The victims of this aggressive sterilisation campaign were reportedly bribed with small amounts of money while others were forced or deceived, with some only discovering that the operation would leave them infertile when it was too late. Women have died and hundreds of survivors left traumatised and disabled for life by these procedures, but outside India the story continues to be underreported.

USAID has denied any connection with coercive policies, but documents have been unearthed linking USAID with programmes going back as far as the 1990s. According to PRI, USAID not only helped to fund population programmes but offered technical support. The scale of USAID’s underhand dealings includes the setting up of what PRI has described as “an unaccountable agency to operate away from public view and outside the democratic process.” It is hard to see how an organisation that has gone to such lengths to cover its tracks could possibly have acted in innocence.
I will return to this matter in future blogposts - with suggestions for action on the part of concerned readers.
Comments on this blog? Email them to up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services

Hate Speech/Free Speech

A reader has reported my blog to Google for hate speech because I COPIED the article from Crisis Magazine.

Crisis Magazine, as most of you know, is an excellent Catholic periodical, highly respected among real Catholics.

This is the type of persecution Catholics will get over the same-sex marriage argument.

I do not know what Google can do about me QUOTING another article, and not making a comment on it.

Keep you posted. This person is a Catholic, btw.

From Crisis

The Totalitarianism of Same-Sex “Marriage”
// Crisis Magazine

Article reposted here.

In November of 1996 First Things hosted a symposium titled “The Judicial Usurpation of Politics” in which contributors discussed the threat to American democracy posed by the Supreme Court instated imposition of abortion on America. Nothing rivals the sheer volume of innocent human beings killed by abortion and yet First Things saw fit to focus not on the babies themselves or the mothers and fathers, but on the threat to democracy and the American experiment posed by the judicial over-reach that legalized abortion.
The legalization of same-sex “marriage” does not bring with it the innocent blood which cries to heaven, though it is perhaps the single most audacious social engineering initiative in American history. But the way in which it has been imposed in state after state, as courts have seen fit to ignore ballot initiatives, sets the stage for a United States Supreme Court ruling on par with Roe vs. Wade. The Supreme Court has announced it will rule on same-sex “marriage” in this sitting—exactly ten years after Canada legalized same-sex “marriage.” It is important for Americans to look at what has happened in Canada.
On July 20, 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world to legalize same-sex “marriage.” On that day the sun rose as it always does, people went to work, daily Mass was celebrated in Catholic Churches and daily life continued to unfold as it normally does. In the days and months following there was no massive spike in the numbers of same-sex couples getting “married” (it had already been legal in 8 of 10 provinces since 2003), the speculated upon possibility of same-sex “marriage” tourism from the United States never really materialized and the Canadian flag was not changed from the maple leaf to the LGBT rainbow. But something very significant happened with the legalization of marriage in Canada and it wasn’t about the freedom of gay people to marry, and it wasn’t really about marriage.
July 20, 2005 marked a very significant step towards totalitarianism in Canada.
Free speech, the rights of parents, the right to preach and practise one’s religion and the worn and tattered fibers of normative decency were all deeply damaged. With the legalization of same-sex “marriage” what had been aberrant only a few years earlier became entrenched as a legal right, and what had been a normal and natural view of sexuality had been reduced to the retrograde thinking of hate crime dinosaurs.
Terrence Prendergast is the Catholic archbishop of Ottawa. Speaking at St. Thomas University in Minnesota in 2012, he outlined the consequences of same-sex “marriage” in Canada. His list included: restrictions on freedoms, forced sex education, sexually confused children, sexual experimentation among children, muzzling and debilitating the Church, more births out of wedlock, more in-vitro fertilizations, more abortions, more poverty, more misery, more disease, more addictions and higher health care costs.
Calgary bishop Frederick Henry was called before a Human Rights Commission Tribunal in 2005 for writing a letter defining Catholic teaching on same-sex “marriage.” During his speech, Archbishop Prendergast quoted Bishop Frederick Henry saying: “Human rights laws designed as a shield are now being used as a sword. The issue is rarely truth formation, but rather censorship, and applying a particular theology through threats, sanctions and punitive measures.” Archbishop Prendergast continued: “The Bible is being called hate literature. Clearly, the Church is in the crosshairs. There will be growing pressure for the Church to comply or be shut down.”
Collective madness is a term usually applied to the fevered frenzy of the mob, but there is a darker, more systematic and more enduring collective madness achieved by reducing obvious truths to elephants in the room. With the legalization of same-sex “marriage” we had a legal edict establishing the normative nature of same-sex “marriage” and thereby ruling out as discriminatory essential arguments about the complementarity of male and female or the procreative purpose of marriage.
Normally, the first thing we notice about a person is their sex, and the first thing we realize when thinking about the sexes is the obvious physical complementarity of male and female, but in the new SSM regime these simple and obvious truths must be appended with a caveat saying that there is no such thing as nature, human sexuality is plastic and there is nothing essentially organic, good and true. This is hugely significant for the psycho-sexual formation of the young and for the happiness and flourishing of individuals and society as a whole, but it is also a decisive step towards the destruction of critical intelligence, the cultivation of abject dependence, and then finally madness and totalitarianism.
Doug Mainwaring works with CanaVox, a project of the Witherspoon Institute. He is a self-described gay man who is abstinent. Mainwaring describes the efforts to redefine marriage as “a form of incremental totalitarianism.” According to Mainwaring “gays and lesbians have been used as pawns by progressives to bring about this wedge issue that I really feel strongly is meant to usher in incremental totalitarianism.”
Stockholm Syndrome was much talked about in the 1970’s when the wealthy heiress Patty Hearst was abducted and held for ransom, but was then shown joining in with her captors robbing a bank and brutalizing innocent people. Before being abducted there was no indication that Hearst was psychopathic, there was no suggestion of a latent criminality, rather the villainy of Patty Hearst was caused by the psychological manipulation of her captors.
For Hearst in captivity, her autonomous personhood was denied. Whether and when she could stand, sit, lie down, eat, drink, sleep, speak or be silent—control over all these things were denied her. She was denied any agency, rendered helpless, obliterated as a person. Then, once a complete breakdown was achieved, small kindnesses and the restoration of order and therefore the possibility of meaning reconstituted her universe. But Hearst’s new universe was created by and ordered around her captor who was now also her saviour.
The legalization of same-sex “marriage” is not about allowing something; same-sex “marriage” was already taking place. It was not about recognizing something; spousal and survivor benefits, family tax incentives and any other advantages to marriage were being or could have been granted without calling it marriage. The legalization of same-sex “marriage” was about prohibiting a definition of heterosexual marriage as normative. It was about the state denying the right to speak one of the most obvious truths about human nature. It was about a conspiracy to enforce collective madness, cultivate psychological dependence and achieve totalitarian control.
Of course it seemed anti-climactic to most, since we seldom see the significance of what is happening as it happens. Further, Canadians as a people pride themselves on their peace-loving agreeability to a fault. The vast majority of Canadians never utter opinions contrary to the spirit of the age, the vast majority of parents passively submit to educational professionals and popular entertainment as the primary educators of their children, a large majority of people no longer take religion seriously, and for those who did, a large majority of the clergy had long ago given up on preaching the more difficult teachings of Christianity.
The march to madness was long and over time there were more and more truths about which we could not speak. In public spaces conservatives had to live increasingly within their own minds, and for anybody, alone in your mind can be a dangerous place. In our Walter Mitty imaginations most of us had swooned in self-adulation at the thought of a glorious last stand that we would make if push ever came to shove. In our mind’s eye our personal Calvary would be heroic and unflinching. But the sad truth is that most of us die by the inch rather than the sword, and this we knew in our heart of hearts, and so many of us came to despise ourselves and give up. The legalization of same-sex “marriage” in Canada has decimated the social conservative movement.
The passage of the Civil Marriage Act was the formal registration of our collective divorce from natural law and sanity. It was a breathtaking example of political and cultural revolution. But at another level it was more than that. With the passage of the Civil Marriage Act we surrendering our right to teach our children about manhood and womanhood, husband and wife. Because the truth is, for the homosexual activists, all along it’s been about the children.
Virtually every homosexual is inordinately preoccupied with his own childhood. Childhood and puberty are the most dynamic periods of psycho-sexual development and all homosexuals puzzle over their sexuality. Unlike animals whose sexuality is purely instinctive, human sexuality is a combination of instinct and socialization. There are many contributors to a child’s socialization; family, peers, schools, culture, but all of these are overseen by the state that has the power of laws and punishments.
The sexual revolutionaries who lobbied for the legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” had already achieved every legal benefit or could have easily achieved every legal benefit enjoyed by heterosexual marriage through equal legal recognition of same-sex civil unions, but that would have fallen short of the prize most coveted, the power to deny heterosexuals any claim to distinctiveness and the right to indoctrinate children accordingly.
A revolution has taken place in Canada. It was a long time coming and all of its fruits have yet to ripen but the revolution has surely happened and the term for the new regime starts with a capital T.

Thanks to Kathy Sinnott and Lynda Finneran who both sent this to me

What same-sex "marriage" has done to Massachusetts? It's far worse than most people realize by Brian Camenker , October 2008 Updated June 2012
Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity which won’t affect the
average person should consider what it has done to Massachusetts since 2004. It’s become a
hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. The slippery slope is real. New radical demands never cease. What has happened in the last several years is truly frightening.
On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge
opinion, declaring that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex “marriage.” Six months
later, despite public outrage, homosexual “weddings” began to take place. And that was just the beginning . . .
The public schools
The homosexual “marriage” onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after
the November 2003 court ruling.
At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and starting families, either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.
Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, Mass., told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the door for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, ‘OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, ‘Give me a break. It's legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.
By the following year it was in elementary school curricula – with hostility toward parents who disagreed. Kindergartners in Lexington, Mass. were given copies of a picture book, Who’s in a Family?, telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, just like their own parents. When David Parker – parent of a kindergartner  – calmly refused to leave a school meeting unless officials agreed to notify him when discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and jailed overnight.
The next year, second graders at the same school were to read a book, King and King, about two men who fall in love and marry each other, ending with a picture of them kissing. When parents Robb and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt their child out.
In 2007 a federal judge ruled that because of “gay marriage” in Massachusetts, parents have no rights regarding the teaching of homosexual relationships in schools.
The previous year the Parkers and Wirthlins had filed a federal civil rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt out their elementary- school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judge dismissed the case. The appeals judges later upheld the first judge’s ruling that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children; and schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt out their children. Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!
Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal,” federal judges have ruled that the schools now have a dutyto portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe! The judges also allowed the school to overrule the Massachusetts parental notification law on this issue, with the claim that homosexuality or same-sex marriages are not“human sexuality issues” (to which the law refers).
School libraries have also radically changed. School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have expanding shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and “lifestyle” in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic. Parents’ complaints are ignored or met with hostility.
A large, slick hardcover book celebrating Massachusetts homosexual marriages began to appear in many school libraries across the state. Titled Courting Equality, it was supplied to schools by a major homosexual activist organization. Its apparent purpose was to teach kids that “gay marriage” was a great civil rights victory.
It has become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to display photos of their same-sex “spouses” and occasionally bring their “spouses” to school functions. At one point, both high schools in my own town had principals who were “married” to their same-sex partners who came to school and were introduced to the students.
“Gay days” in schools are considered necessary to fight “intolerance” against same-sex relationships. Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now hold “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender days.” In my own town, a school committee member announced that combating “homophobia” was now a top priority. The schools not only “celebrate” homosexual marriage, but have moved beyond to promote other behaviors such as cross-dressing and transsexuality.
As a result, many more children in Massachusetts appear to be self-identifying as “gay.” According to the Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey, given to students in high schools across the state, between 2005 and 2009 both the percentage of kids “identifying as gay” and who had same-sex contact rose by approximately 50%. Although this bi-annual survey is unscientific and largely unreliable, it still shows a disturbing trend among those students who chose to answer the questions in this way. (At a minimum, it implies that these answers are being encouraged.)
Once homosexuality is normalized, all boundaries begin to come down. The schools have already moved on to normalizing transgenderism (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth, which goes into schools with homosexual and transgender programs and activities for children, includes prominent activists who are transsexuals.
In 2006 a cross-dressing man undergoing a sex-change operation was brought into a third-grade class in Newton to teach the children that there are now “different kinds of families.” School officials told a mother that her complaints to the principal were considered “inappropriate behavior”! She ended up removing her child from the school.
Public health
The Commissioner of the Mass. Dept. of Public Health, who is "married" to another man, told a crowd of kids at the state-sponsored Youth Pride event in 2007 that it’s “wonderful being gay” and he wants to make sure there’s enough HIV testing available for all of them.
The STD test required to obtain a marriage license was eliminated five months after same-sex “marriages” began in Massachusetts, by a bill quietly signed by Gov. Mitt Romney. This was despite an increase in syphilis cases and other STDs in homosexual men in Massachusetts at the time (according to the Mass. Dept. of Public Health).
In recent years state funding for HIV/AIDS programs has gone up considerably in Massachusetts, along with the proportion of homosexual-related cases. According to the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health, even though the total number of new HIV/AIDS diagnoses has declined, the proportion caused by male homosexual behavior rose by over 30% from 2000-2009. Thus, for the last several years the state has budgeted $30-$35 million per year for these programs. This dwarfs spending on any other viral disease that we are aware of.
A hideously obscene booklet on “gay” practices created by health officials was given out in a high school. Citing “the right to marry” as one of the “important challenges” in a place where “it’s a great time to be gay,” the Mass. Dept. of Public Health helped the AIDS Action Committee produce The Little Black Book: Queer in the 21st Century. It was given to teens at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives “tips” to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to “safely” have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It even included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.
Because of the purported necessity to cater to “LGBT health” issues, nearly every major Boston hospital has become an active supporter of the radical homosexual movement. This includes marching in the “Gay Pride” parades, holding homosexual events, and putting on numerous “gay health”-related seminars. This is one of the most disturbing things that’s happened since “gay marriage” became “legal.”
A major Boston hospital threatened to fire a physician when he objected to its promotion of homosexual behavior. In 2011 a prominent physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston – a large Harvard-affiliated hospital – objected to the hospital being involved with “Gay Pride” activities. He also pointed out to his superiors the medical health risks of homosexuality, and said that he and others at the hospitalconsidered homosexual acts to be unnatural and immoral. The hospital then threatened to fire him, telling him that same-sex marriage is “legal” and that his comments constituted “harassment and discrimination.” After a “hearing” he was allowed to keep his job, but was told to apologize and to keep his opinions on these matters to himself.
In 2012 the Boston Medical Center purchased a prominent full-color ad (full page, inside cover) in the Boston Gay Pride guide book. The content? The entire ad promoted the hospital’s STD and AIDS clinics for the “pride” participants – particularly its screening services for gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, hepatitis, and HIV.
Domestic violence
Every year more state money goes to deal with the high incidence of homosexual domestic violence. Since “gay marriage” began, Massachusetts has one of the highest proportions of homosexuals living as couples in the country. Given the extremely dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more and more money to deal with that problem. “Gay domestic violence programs” have also become a major lobbying push in the State House by the homosexual group MassEquality. This year it comprises a considerable portion of a $5.5 million state budget item (according to MassEquality). This is up from $100,000 budgeted in 2007.
“Gay domestic partner violence” literature (funded by the state) is now distributed at virtually every public homosexual event – including to childrenat “Youth Pride” events, GLSEN conferences, “gay straight alliance” high school clubs – and especially at the various events and parades during “Gay Pride” week.
It has become such a problem that a public candlelight vigil in downtown Boston is held every year by a coalition of Massachusetts homosexual groups “to remember victims of recent LGBT intimate partner violence, and to raise awareness of this important community issue.”
Business and employment
All insurance in Massachusetts must now recognize same-sex “married” couples in their coverage. This includes auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.
Businesses must recognize same-sex “married” couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.
People can now get fired from their jobs for expressing religious objections to same-sex “marriage.” In 2009, a deputy manager at a Brookstone store in Boston was fired from his job for mentioning his belief to another manager who had kept bringing up the subject with him that day. Brookstone’s letter of termination (quoted on local TV news) said his comment was “inappropriate” because “in the State of Massachusetts, same-sex marriage is legal.”
The wedding industry is required to serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must accept same-sex marriage events or be held liable for discrimination.
Businesses are often “tested” for tolerance by homosexual activists. Groups of homosexual activists go into restaurants or bars and publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment demonstrates sufficient “equality” — now that homosexual marriage is “legal.” Then they report “tolerance violators” to authorities, and businesses can be fined and punished. In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection are seen in public places across the state to reinforce "marriage equality." Legal profession and judicial system
The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex marriage "law." In 2007, a Boston man failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer a question about homosexual marriage.
In many firms, lawyers in Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual "marriage." Issues regarding homosexual “families” are now firmly entrenched in the Massachusetts legal system. In addition, there are now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.
In 2011 the Governor appointed Barbara Lenk, a “married” lesbian activist, to be a state Supreme Court Justice. She has said that the interpretation of law “evolves and develops” because “minority groups [e.g., homosexuals] see certain things differently based on their own experiences.”
Adoption and birth certificates
In the year after the “gay marriage” ruling, the state’s adoption and foster care workers went through a massive indoctrination on “LGBT youth awareness.” This included employees and managers at the Mass. Dept. of Social Services. These sessions were run by the radical National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (which once awarded a “Leather Leadership Award” to the owner of a pornographic video company). The emphasis was that those working with children must be trained that homosexuality (and transgenderism) are normal. At one session, the trainer announced that the new motto is, “To tolerate is an assault; you have to accept” this behavior.
Homosexual “married” couples can now demand to be allowed to adopt children – through any agency. In 2006 Catholic Charities decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations requiring them to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their care.
Adoption agencies have said that 40% of their adoptions are to homosexual couples. Anecdotal reports also indicate that many adoption agencies now favor homosexuals over normal couples.
In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men “married” to each other as their “Parents of the Year.” The men had adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the baby’s birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that adoption was final, DSS approached the men about adopting a second child.
The state-funded Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange (MARE) has been pushing “GLBT” family formation and holds “adoption parties”where homosexual couples have been encouraged to attend (along with others) and see “available” children in person. MARE places prominent ads in GLBT publications.
Birth certificates in Massachusetts have been changed from “mother” and “father” to “mother/parent” and “father/parent.” Two men or two women can now be listed as the “parents” on birth certificates! Homosexuals who adopt can revise children’s’ existing birth certificates.
A court ruled in 2012 that if a child is “born of a same-sex marriage,” there is no need for adoption by a non-biological parent. Thus, they would both be then listed as the “parents” on the child’s birth certificate, without any formal proceedings necessary.
(The other biological parent is not noted on the official birth certificate.)
Government mandates
Marriage licenses and certificates in Massachusetts now have “Party A” and “Party B” instead of “husband” and “wife.” Imagine having a marriage license like that.
In 2004, Governor Mitt Romney ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. Several Justices of the Peace immediately decided to resign. That order still stands. Also Town Clerks were forced by the Governor’s office to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual “married” couples in the coverage.
The public square
Since gay “marriage” began, public “Gay Pride” events have become more prominent in the public square. There are more politicians and corporations participating, and even police organizations take part. And the envelope gets pushed further and further. For example: the annual profane “Dyke March” through downtown Boston, and the 2008 “transgender” parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed (so they could “become” men). Governor Patrick even marched with his 17-year-old “out lesbian” daughter in the 2008 Boston Pride event, right behind a sadomasochist “leather” group brandishing a black and blue flag, lashes and chains!
Churches being harassed
Churches and religious people have been demonized, harassed and threatened – with no punishment for the perpetrators. Since the “gay marriage” ruling, those who publicly disagree with “gay marriage” or the normalcy of homosexuality – or hold events promoting traditional beliefs – are targets of militant retribution by homosexual activists. Police and public officials have shown no interest in stopping this. We are not aware of a single homosexual activist arrested (or charged with any “hate crime”) for disrupting a religious event or threatening and harassing people at a church. For example:
In 2012 someone threatened to burn down a Catholic Church in Acushnet which posted the words “Two men are friends, not spouses” on its outdoor sign. The church immediately received a flood of profane phone calls. At least one person threatened to burn down the church. An activist nailed a sign to church’s fence saying, “Spread love not hate.” Activists staged a protest outside of the Sunday Mass to intimidate parishioners with a sign saying, “It is legal for two men or women to be spouses.” Neither the police nor the District Attorney pursued the threats as a hate crime or other offense.
In 2010 a Catholic elementary school balked at letting a lesbian couple enroll their son. As a result, the school was excoriated in the media and even by the local liberal state representative as “discriminatory.” The privately-run Catholic Schools Foundation then threatened to withhold funding to the school unless it relented. The Archdiocese eventually backed down and the school reversed its policy.
In 2009 angry homosexual activists terrorized the Park Street Church in Boston while it was holding an ex-gay religious training session inside. They demonstrated next to the doors and windows with signs, screaming homosexual slogans. One of them held a bullhorn against the window outside the meeting, bellowing at the participants inside. Police did nothing to stop them, even though they were standing inside the historic cemetery adjacent to the church.
In 2006 dozens of screaming homosexual activists drowned out the speakers at an outdoor pro-marriage rallyin Worcester organized by Catholic Vote, yelling “Bigots” and disgusting chants. Police did not stop them, even though the rally had a permit. When one of the rioters rushed the stage and started shouting, a rally organizer tried to lead her to the side. She subsequently sued that organizer for assault! He went through a four-day trial and was acquitted by a jury. But no charges were filed against any of the rioters.
In 2006 a group of homosexual activists with signs taunted and screamed at people entering and leaving the Tremont Temple Baptist Church in downtown Boston, which was holding a nationally televised pro-marriage event inside.
In 2005 hundreds of homosexual activists terrorized the Tremont Temple Baptist Church with makeshift coffins, screaming obscenities through loudspeakers as the national pro-family group Focus on the Family held a religious conference inside. The crowd was so threatening that attendees could not leave the church for the lunch break. The Boston riot police stood in front of the church doors, but did nothing to disperse the protesters who were also completely blocking the street.
The media
The Boston media regularly features articles and news stories using homosexual “married” couples where regular married couples would normally be used. It’s “equal,” they insist, so there must be no difference in how marriage is portrayed. Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual "marriage" issues – and how to properly accept it.
A number of news reporters and TV anchors are “out” homosexuals (at least one openly “married”) who march in the “Gay Pride” parades and publicly participate in other homosexual events.
A climate of fear has kept politicians at all levels from disagreeing with or criticizing same-sex marriage since it became “legal.” Public officials are afraid of being accused of wanting to “take away rights.” Those who support traditional marriage rarely discuss it publicly. And this fear has expanded to suppress any meaningful debate on all homosexual related issues. Additionally, it has brought a feeling of intimidation among pro-family people across the state.
The Massachusetts Republican establishment has become arguably the most “pro-gay marriage” GOP in America. The state GOP House and Senate leaders now both publicly support “gay marriage,” as did the recent Mass. GOP candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor. GOP candidates for office are told not even to discuss it.
In April 2009, the Chairman of the Mass. Republican Party told a homosexual newspaper that the GOP would no longer oppose “gay marriage.” Then Chairman Jennifer Nassour, interviewed on the front page of Bay Windows,assured the gay community that the state GOP would “steer clear of social” issues such as “opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion.” The newly elected chairman, Bob Maginn, does not talk about the issue.
Every Massachusetts state-wide elected official and member of Congress (but one) now publicly supports “gay marriage.” The one (apparent) holdout, Republican US Senator Scott Brown, strenuously avoids the issue, saying that it’s “settled law” and not worth fighting over.
Rule of law
Same-sex “marriage” came to Massachusetts through a radical court’s narrow ruling. Because of that, there is an often depressing sense of helplessness that pervades this issue. The marriage statute was never changed, and it has been convincingly argued that the whole process was in violation of the state constitution. The Governor simply went along. And the Legislature acted to block popular votes on two separate constitutional amendments protecting marriage, after sufficient signatures had been gathered for each. The rule of law seems further lost with every new outrage imposed on the people.
Even the Massachusetts Law Library (online) shows no law legalizing same-sex marriage, only a court opinion. It is a dangerous precedent to allow such sweeping judicial activism to stand as law, enabling everything that has followed from it. It should serve as a warning to states across the country.
In conclusion
Same-sex “marriage” hangs over society, hammering citizens with the force of law. Once it gets a foothold, society becomes more oppressive. Unfortunately, it was imposed on the people of Massachusetts through a combination of radical, arrogant judges and pitifully cowardly politicians. The homosexual movement has used that combination to its continued advantage around the country. It’s pretty clear that this radical movement is obsessed with marriage not because large numbers of homosexuals actually want to marry each other. A small percentage actually “marry.” (In fact, over the last several months, the Sunday Boston Globe’smarriage section hasn’t had any photos of homosexual marriages; at first it was full of them.) Research shows that homosexuals’ relationships are fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and real “marriage” as we know it isn’t something they can achieve, or even truly desire. The push for “gay marriage” is really is about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and forcing its acceptance on (otherwise unwilling) citizens and our social, political, and commercial institutions.
To the rest of America: You've been forewarned.
Copyright (c) 2012 MassResistance
(For a downloadable version of this article and links
to further material see
This pamphlet is also available in booklet form