Moral Issues

[admin]

Sex before 8 – or it's too late!
Posted: March 14, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Craige McMillan
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com



Sometimes what you don't say is as important as what you do say. In that vein, if you believe the media in America, then last year 92,700 men and boys in the U.S. were raped by women. Are you incredulous? Me, too.

But I draw that conclusion because the national media has reported no homosexual rapes of men or boys last year. The crime statistic comes from a 1998 federal study, which also found 302,100 females raped in the same "average" year. (Cited in USA Today, "Natural rape theory creates instant storm," by Dan Vergano, Jan. 18, 2000.)

There was no lack of stories about these women, however. Go to any major news site and type "rape" into their search engine. Dozens or hundreds of stories appear; all cases of men raping women or girls. Is there even one story about men raping boys?

In fact, I don't believe that 92,700 men and boys were raped last year by American women. I believe that the overwhelming majority were raped by homosexual men.

"Ho, hum," says the U.S. media. "Don't bother us. We're busy. We have these water buckets we're carrying for NAMBLA." Those initials stand for the North American Man Boy Love Association. Their long-standing motto, "sex before eight – or it's too late," only recently revised, makes their intent pretty clear.

Homosexuals, as represented in the U.S. media, come in only two varieties: upstanding citizen and persecuted victim.

Do homosexual priests rape choirboys? Not in medialand. There, Catholic priests abuse children – a phrase that's so gender-inclusive, and manages to twist one's attention onto the Catholic church, not the homosexual men who have made inroads into the clergy so they can prey on the innocence of children.

Do homosexual pastors rape congregants? Not in medialand. There "ministers are found with naked teens" and charged with "unlawful sex acts with a minor." Such inclusive language … my, isn't the media open-minded and progressive? We'd never guess it was male pastors and little boys, would we?

No, homosexual pastors and priests are all "victims" of "religious discrimination" and the "homophobia" of parents not open-minded enough to want predatory homosexual men who commit rapes in this country to be preying on their 8-year-old children. Except the homosexual bucket-brigade in the U.S. media doesn't have time to tell us that. No, they're too busy getting homosexuals into our churches as pastors, into our schools as teachers and coaches, into Boy Scout troops as scoutmasters, and into every other major position of authority over children.

The media is too busy raping the Christian church on its news pages, the Boy Scouts during its evening news broadcasts, and the military in its editorials and at its cocktail parties. No, Mom, Dad, Grandma and Grandpa don't warrant the truth, because it just might slow down the bucket brigade, and imply that homosexuals could possibly be, like the rest of us, just a smidgen short of sainthood.

At this point I truly wish we could take a trip back in time to Joseph Goebbels' office in Nazi Germany. Don't you think the propaganda master would be astonished at the ideological bucket brigade the U.S. media has become?

Oddly enough, I don't condemn homosexuals – they are in the grip of an incredibly powerful delusion and acting in what they believe are their own best interests. Unfortunately, their best interests do not coincide with the best interests of children, families and the next generation.

No, my condemnation is reserved for those who know the truth, but speak and write the big lie. Surely the question asked by Jesus of the ancient Israeli priesthood about their lies and hypocrisy loaded onto the backs of the common people applies to the American media today:

"You serpents, you generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of Hell?"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Special offer:

"Bias": CBS insider Bernard Goldberg's blockbuster exposes the truth about TV news and is making networks cringe. Available now in WorldNetDaily's online store!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Craige McMillan is a commentator for WorldNetDaily. He is the founder of CC&M, an exciting new initiative to reshape the way America looks at and interacts with people of faith.
Christine

[admin]

'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause 12/4/2002
By Allyson Smith



"I really don't feel sorry for her. She paid a very steep price for being an arrogant religious fascist. Too bad for her." – "Iris," in a posting on the ACLU Online Forum.




"Quite frankly, if anyone in this case was being ‘persecuted’ it was Mr. Gutierrez. Unfortunately for the victim this was a lesson that she learned too hard and too late. Maybe this will give pause to other people who similarly try to ‘help’ homosexuals." — "Silence Dogood," on ACLU Online Forum.






Mary Stachowicz

In the three weeks since Mary Stachowicz was murdered by homosexual Nicholas Gutierrez in Chicago, some pro-homosexualists have reacted with much more sympathy for the ‘gay’ killer than for his Christian victim. In fact, several even have gone as far as saying that Mrs. Stachowicz deserved to die for questioning the man’s lifestyle.






Predictably, the mainstream media and homosexual advocacy organizations have reacted to Mary Stachowicz’s murder the same way they did to 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising’s torture-murder at the hands of two homosexual men in 1999: by avoiding it. As of December 4, no formal condemnations of Mrs. Stachowicz’s murder have been issued by leading groups such as the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, or the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.




Soulforce, a group that works in churches to oppose the traditional Christian view of homosexuality, issued no press statement, but a spokeswoman did give a quote to The Washington Times:




"We condemn this murder, like we do all murders," said Laura Montgomery Rutt, spokeswoman for Soulforce. "A hate crime needs to have an intent to intimidate a whole class of people. If in this case, it was directed at this person and intended to intimidate Christians, that would be a hate crime in my mind."




A devout Catholic, Mary Stachowicz met her martyrdom while working at the Sikorski Funeral Home on Chicago’s northwest side, where she got to know Gutierrez, 19, who lived in a second-floor apartment above the funeral home. On the afternoon of November 13, Stachowicz attended Mass at St. Hyacinth parish across the street, then returned to the funeral home and went to visit Gutierrez in his apartment.




According to Chicago police, an argument broke out when Mrs. Stachowicz lectured Gutierrez about his lifestyle and his lack of direction in life. Gutierrez later told police that he had issues with his mother and that the way Stachowicz was talking to him gave him flashbacks of his mother that angered him.




When Stachowicz asked him, "Why do you boys instead of girls?" Gutierrez snapped. In a fit of rage, he punched, kicked, stabbed and strangled the 51-year-old wife and mother of four. Gutierrez then stuffed her body into a crawl space under the floor of his apartment, where it remained for two days until he confessed to police.




Family members were baffled by Stachowicz’s disappearance. They posted fliers in neighborhoods, and her daughter made a public plea for her safe return.




"My sister is very healthy. She's very stable. She has the closest family you can imagine," Stachowicz’s younger sister, Alice Kosinski, told NBC5.com. "Her faith would not allow for anything out of the ordinary."




After learning of Gutierrez’s confession, Stachowicz’s loved ones agreed that the circumstances of her murder were in keeping with her character. Kosinski told The Chicago Tribune, "Because she's so Catholic, there's no room for being gay in the Catholic Church."




Friend Mary Coleman said, "Those of us who knew her immediately hear her soft voice saying something like, 'God wouldn't approve of the way you're living your life.’ That's how Mary did things."




Rev. Francis Rog of St. Hyacinth Church told ABC 7 Chicago news, "She was a very intense person, concerned about the good of the parish, always seeking things for the poor as well as spiritual welfare for people."




Police recovered Stachowicz’s body on November 15 and charged Gutierrez two days later with first-degree murder, concealing a homicidal death, and burglary for attempting to steal money from Stachowicz’s purse.




Chicago local media reported these events, choosing headlines devoid of the words "gay" or "homosexual." In contrast, several homosexual publications – including Gay.com/PlanetOut.com, Gay People’s Chronicle, and the Washington Blade -- did use "gay" in their headlines.




Gay.com began running the story on November 19, a full week before the first mainstream news story appeared in The Washington Times.




The same day, National Review Online columnist Rod Dreher published a commentary titled These Victims Are People, Too" wherein he lamented "the deafening media silence around the savage murder of Mary Stachowicz" and speculated on its cause:




"One cannot help wondering if the upright citizens who report the news don't privately share the view of gay blogger James Wagner, who said of Stachowicz’s strangling:





The woman who did such great evil is dead, but unfortunately the evil and the church and the society which creates it is not, and it will continue to destroy Nicholas Gutierrez and many others. I shake, safely sitting here at home, fully understanding, and fully familiar with, the horrible impact her words must have had for a man already so terribly damaged by his society, and his own mother.





Dreher added, "I believe many, and probably most, journalists share the unspoken assumption that Christians bring such trouble on themselves."




That assumption appears to be shared by pro-homosexual cyber citizens. A search for "Mary Stachowicz" on message boards, e-mail lists, and Web logs (blogs) turned up several people who reacted viciously toward Stachowicz and Christianity.


(continued in next post)

[admin]

For example, James Wagner’s boyfriend, Barry, expressed the hope on his blog that "maybe will strike fear in the hearts of a few fundamentalists" and then asked, "Where do I send a check for his (Gutierrez’s) defense fund?"




James and Barry’s statements drew the following response from fellow homosexual Michael Benedetto:




"I think that if gays are going to continue to have any credibility in politics, our sympathies in cases like this are going to have to lie first and foremost with the victims. And that's one upsetting thing about Barry's and James' posts: Until the criticism started to roll in, the only sympathy they expressed was for the wrong person."




Elsewhere, Benedetto wrote, "es, the woman (Stachowicz) was clearly a meddlesome b---- who didn't understand that the lives of her co-workers were none of her business. That does not make her any less the victim, or absolve her killer of any of his guilt."




"I don’t condone this murder, BUT …."




Several posts implied that Stachowicz had brought on her own death. One man wrote to a Yahoo discussion forum, "It's Sad Someone Was Murdered, BUT... ...I do wish the Religious Wrong would learn to mind their own business."




"Iris" wrote to the ACLU Online Forum: "I am in no way condoning this man's behavior. Murder is murder. He should receive life or the death penalty for his actions. But one fact remains ... if she would have been minding her own business instead of attempting to ram her religion where it didn't belong, none of this would have ever happened. I really don't feel sorry for her. She paid a very steep price for being an arrogant religious fascist. Too bad for her."




"Silence Dogood" agreed: "I won't go so far as to say that she deserved what she got, no one deserves to die, but I won't exactly be shedding any tears for her. Quite frankly, if anyone in this case was being 'persecuted' it was Mr. Gutierrez. Unfortunately for the victim this was a lesson that she learned too hard and too late. Maybe this will give pause to other people who similarly try to ‘help’ homosexuals."








"Real" hate crimes




Other discussions centered on the characteristics of hate crimes. "Real" hate crimes, explained ACLU Online Forum member "morningstar," must be like Matthew Shepard’s murder; they must be premeditated and target a group.




"KingFred" wrote to the MacAddict Forum: "Since (Gutierrez has) already admitted he did the crime, there's no question he should do the time. But ‘hate crime’? Don't see it here. He didn't go out to get himself a Christian. He did in a person who may have been berating him, using her Christian beliefs as ‘weapons'. That doesn't justify what he did by any means, but it may explain it."




Catholic League President William Donohue summed up the problems with hate crimes statutes as illustrated by Mary Stachowicz’s murder in a November 26 press release:




"A few thoughts on this matter: a) this (Mary’s murder) will not be listed as a hate crime, thus showing how useless this category of crime is; b) the killer is going to be charged with a capital offense, thus showing once again how useless this category of crime is; c) Mary Stachowicz will never be remembered the way Matthew Shepard is, thus showing how politically corrupt the whole concept of hate crime legislation really is. The fact is she was murdered for having a Catholic-informed conscience."




Others blamed the Roman Catholic Church for Stachowicz’s murder. On the Naked Writing blog, "JodyW" commented, "Gutierrez is responsible for what he did. So the RCC is responsible for continuing to put forth a silly, stupid and factually wrong doctrine of ‘objective disorders’ and ‘intrinsic moral evil’ regarding homosexuality. For all that that evil that that doctrine has done and continues to do, they have a lot to be held accountable for."




Perhaps the cruelest comment of all was this from a San Francisco man on Yahoo: "The b---- had it coming to her. I'm glad he killed her. Too bad he'll probably spend the rest of his life in prison getting his little butt pounded, but still, I'm glad he killed her. The b---- deserved to die."




Mary Stachowicz, R.I.P.




The Chicago Tribune published the following obituary for Mary:




Mary Stachowicz, nee Frank, devoted wife of Jerry; beloved mother of Peter, Christopher, Angela (Louie) Ruffolo and Daniel; loving daughter of Agnes and the late Rudolf Frank; dear sister of Irene (John) Rog and Alice (Mark) Kosinski. Funeral Tuesday, 9:30 a.m., from Cumberland Chapels, 8300 W. Lawrence Ave., Norridge, to St. Hyacinth Church, Mass 11 a.m. Interment St. Adalbert Cemetery.




Four pages of condolences accompanied the obituary, where former classmates, co-workers and other family friends left messages of sympathy for Mary’s tragic demise.




The Chicago Sun-Times reported that, after Mary’s death, Alderwoman Vilma Colom (35th) introduced a city council resolution in her memory. "She lost her life in an unselfish attempt to help a very disturbed young man, and for that she should be remembered," said Colom, who goes to the same church Stachowicz did.




Mary’s sister, Alice Kosinski, told the Chicago Tribune that her sister's death is difficult for everyone in her family to fathom.




"We're not doing that well," she said. "It just doesn't make any sense, and somehow we're going to have to make our peace with it."









Christine

[admin]

Sex ed and the destruction of American morality
Posted: January 18, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Samuel Blumenfeld



Ideas have consequences, and bad ideas have bad consequences. The ideas behind sex education have done more to destroy biblically based moral values than any other secular force in America.

The first idea to become a battering ram against traditional sexual morality was Sigmund Freud's dictum that sexual repression causes neurosis. If sexual repression creates dysfunction, then the remedy, of course, is free sexual expression. That was not the cure Freud recommended, but Freud's ideas so strongly influenced American culture that clothes for women went from the trussed up sexually repressed fashions of 1900 to the loose liberating flapper skirts of the roaring twenties – in only 20 years!

Greenwich Village bohemians and intellectuals took to Freud like ducks to water. It provided a scientific justification for their free-love promiscuity and disregard of bourgeois morals.

The second major idea came from socialist Margaret Sanger, free-love advocate, who launched a campaign in 1916 to promote contraception and abortion in order to free women from the burdens of unwanted pregnancy.

Sanger later adopted the views of the eugenicists who promoted the idea that only "the fit" should be encouraged to have children and "the unfit" discouraged from doing so. Sex education became an indispensable part of Sanger's birth-control movement. As a result, Planned Parenthood, which she founded, became the pioneer advocate of comprehensive sex education in the schools.

In 1953, Planned Parenthood staffer Lena Levine wrote, " is to be ready as educators and parents to help young people obtain sex satisfaction before marriage. By sanctioning sex before marriage, we will prevent fear and guilt … we must be ready to provide young boys and girls with the best contraception measures available so they will have the necessary means to achieve sexual satisfaction without having to risk possible pregnancy."

The third evil idea came from sexologist Alfred C. Kinsey, head of the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. Dr. Kinsey's famous report, "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male," published in 1958, preached the idea that human beings are sexual from birth. The data on 317 infants and young boys supposedly provided the scientific source of that idea. This data was obtained from a pedophile who had actually masturbated infants and boys and kept records of his criminal experiments. All of this was exposed years later by Dr. Judith Reisman, who accused Kinsey of complicity in the sexual abuse of young children.

The fourth idea came from Dr. Mary Calderone, past Medical Director of Planned Parenthood. She and her humanist colleagues launched SIECUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States, at the Kinsey Institute, specifically to teach Kinseyan sexual ideology as sex education. Dr. Calderone transformed sex education into the sexuality education presently taught in American schools. SIECUS provides most of the teaching materials now used in the public schools.

The fifth revolutionary idea came from the "Humanist Manifesto II" (1973) which challenged the views of traditional religion regarding sexual behavior and proclaimed total sexual freedom among consenting adults as the new moral standard for sexual behavior. The manifesto was signed by many academicians, including sexologist Dr. Lester A. Kirkendall, a director of SIECUS, and Dr. Alan C. Guttmacher, president of Planned Parenthood.

In 1976, Dr. Kirkendall published "A New Bill of Sexual Rights and Responsibilities," signed by 37 leading sexologists and authors. The book states: "Humanists have had an important role in the sexual revolution. Although 'Humanist Manifesto II' contains a brief section on sexuality, we thought a more detailed statement would be useful."

Out of this interlocking directorate of humanist sex education organizations came the curriculum of sex education for American schools. And the result has been rampant premarital sex among students leading to unwanted pregnancy, abortion, single parenthood, sexually transmitted diseases, physical abuse and even murder of sexual partners, increased sexual perversion, children living in poverty without fathers, emotional turmoil, drug addiction, depression, the proliferation of pornography. In other words, premarital sex has created more social problems and pathology in America than any other activity, and it can virtually all be blamed on sex ed.

What's the solution? According to the sexologists, we need more sex ed, not less. And so politicians have decided to help by injecting federal funds into sexuality programs for schools. The result is that sex ed has become raunchier, more disgusting, and more blasphemous of traditional values.

The only solution for parents is homeschooling or private schools. That's the only way they can protect the innocence of their children.

In 1999, SIECUS asked readers to name those people who have done the most to affirm sexuality. The top 10, chosen out of 100, were: Judy Blume, Mary Calderone, Ellen DeGeneres, Jocelyn Elders, Hugh Hefner, Anita Hill, Magic Johnson, Madonna, Gloria Steinem and Ruth Westheimer. Only in America!


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Samuel L. Blumenfeld is the author of eight books on education, including: "Is Public Education Necessary?" "NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education," "The Whole Language/OBE Fraud" and "Homeschooling: A Parents Guide to Teaching Children." His books are available on Amazon.com. Back issues of his incisive newsletter, The Blumenfeld Education Letter, are available online.
Christine

[admin]

Sodomy lobby censorship aimed at Michael Savage
Posted: March 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Les Kinsolving






© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

After years of pleading for tolerance of themselves, even though they are by far the nation's leading spreaders of HIV, AIDS and now syphilis, those homosexual militants, the Sodomy Lobby, are now again launching into censorship of those who dare to criticize them.

My WCBM Baltimore and Talk Radio Network colleague, Michael Savage, has dared to say: "The gay and lesbian mafia wants our children."

He is therefore the target of a protest scheduled for Wednesday by an organization called the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

They, in turn, have recruited the National Organization for Women, who elected a president who sexually switches between a male husband and a lesbian lover.

GLAAD's news media director, Cathy Renna, has warned GE (which owns NBC) and Microsoft (which owns MSNBC): "There are a lot of different organizations concerned about giving a platform to Michael Savage," as MSNBC has just done, for a 1-hour weekend show.

"Giving a platform" were news media director Renna's precise words about Savage. But Michael already has a platform – of nearly 400 radio stations, plus the No. 1-rated book on the New York Times Best Seller List for the past five weeks.

To its great credit, MSNBC has refused to let these two extremist organizations censor Savage.

In a statement, MSNBC said, "The addition of Michael Savage to the MSNBC lineup was made with the full awareness of his reputation for controversy and confrontation. We respect the right of those who wish to protest. However, we also strongly defend his new show as a legitimate attempt to expand the marketplace of ideas. By bringing our viewers a wide range of strong opinionated voices, MSNBC underscores its commitment to ensuring that its perspective programming promotes no one single point of view. We encourage debate and we would neither expect nor want our audience to agree with everything on our channel."

Actually, the protest and attempted censorship by the Sodomy Lobby and its ally the National Organization for Women, should provide considerable stimulus and viewer attention to MSNBC's new weekend Savage show. For there are many, many millions of Americans who strongly agree with his statement: "The gay and lesbian mafia wants our children."

The largest publicly known organization of child molesters is the homosexual pederast group called North American Man-Boy Love Association. Their members, when caught and indicted, evoke no comments whatsoever from the Sodomy Lobby with whom they have actually paraded in both New York and San Francisco.

Kim Gandy, of NOW, claims that in hiring Savage, MSNBC "has created a situation that makes it impossible to get a moderate message out."

Even if NOW were at all moderate, rather than extreme, this statement about an alleged impossibility of getting a "moderate" (translate: pro-sodomy-acceptance) message out, ignores the vast majority of our nation's daily newspapers, magazines and TV networks.

Only on talk radio and the Internet (which allow far more public expression than the rest of the media) is there any real opportunity for those who express what most Americans believe.

Fox News has been a pioneer in doing so and now MSNBC.

The New York Post reports:

"Savage is angrily threatening to counter-attack 'with all the abilities I have' including filing lawsuits and, if necessary, mobilizing his army of listeners.

"I'm not Dr. Laura and I'm not going to lift my skirts and run," Savage told the Post, referring to the tough radio shrink whose 2000 TV show was set upon by gay-rights groups that scared away advertisers and, arguably, forced a toned-down program that few watched, resulting in an early demise.

"If we let these bastards win, they will have elevated themselves to being a de-facto national television censorship board," said Savage.

The Bronx-raised Savage says he is being persecuted because of "My conservative beliefs pure and simple." He vows to counter-attack if he feels his career is threatened – alleging, if necessary a litany of abuses like "civil and/or religious-rights violations, hate crimes, economic terrorism" and even racketeering.

"If I have to, I'll ask my 5 million listeners ... to lobby the Justice Department to investigate these groups to see if they have broken the law," said Savage whose national radio show is carried from 8 to 10 p.m. on New York's WABC.

In Springfield, Mass., Talkers magazine publisher Michael Harrison said: "The only thing that is going to get Michael Savage off the air is low ratings and MSNBC doesn't need to worry about losing advertisers the way hundreds of high-rated TV stations did with Dr. Laura – there's a big difference in being opposite O'Reilly and Oprah. Organized attacks on Savage may actually work to his advantage. They were able to get to Laura personally and shake her up, whereas Savage will counter-attack and grow stronger. They will increase his resolve and perhaps even his ratings because controversy can significantly boost ratings."

Ms. Renna of GLAAD told the Post: "Everything from the childish name-calling, to his notion that the U.S. Justice Department is his personal posse, seemed a product of a seriously disturbed individual."

Ladies and gentlemen: Who sounds more disturbed? The Sodomy Lobby's Renna? Or Michael Savage?


Les Kinsolving hosts a daily talk show for WCBM in Baltimore. His radio commentaries are syndicated nationally. He is White House correspondent for Talk Radio Network and WorldNetDaily. He has been selected by Talkers Magazine as one of the top 100 radio hosts for the last six years. Before going into broadcasting, Kinsolving was a newspaper reporter and columnist – twice nominated for the Pulitzer Prize for his commentary.

To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31345

Christine

[admin]

Homosexual Lobby Declares War on MSNBC’s Michael Savage 3/5/2003
By Peter LaBarbera



GLAAD Cites His Criticism of Tax-funded Transsexual Operations, Homosexuality in Schools

The homosexual media-pressure group GLAAD is turning all its weapons on conservative talk show host Michael Savage—slated to become a talker on the cable TV network MSNBC—but you might be surprised at some of GLAAD’s best examples of Savage’s “bigotry.”


GLAAD, Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, is urging MSNBC to rethink hiring Savage, who currently broadcasts out of the San Francisco-based radio station KSFO. (MSNBC is bringing on Savage to replace the liberal, pro-homosexual Phil Donohue, whose show flopped.) GLAAD blasted Savage for spewing “hateful, defamatory rhetoric,” and gives the following as examples:



· Savage criticized San Francisco’s taxpayer funding of transsexual sex-change operations, which he calls the “medical travesty of self mutilation”;
· Criticism of homosexual activism in schools, e.g., he writes that “In California, teachers (starting with kindergarten) are being encouraged to teach that homosexuality, bisexuality—and even transsexuality— normal behavior.” In a column, Savage wrote, "The gay and lesbian mafia want our children. If they can win their souls and their minds, it knows their bodies will follow. Of course, it wants to homosexualize the entire country, not just the children.";

· His linkage of homosexuality to priests who have seduced and abused boys. He writes: “You don’t blame the entire church for the actions of boll weevils who use the edifice in order to do their crimes”;

· His chastisement of liberals’ social relativism, which says that even sadomasochism is an acceptable “choice” but that allowing prayer in schools is dangerous. (He writes: “In effect, the liberal says, 'If you want to go into a parade and dress up with whips and chains and beat each other up — fine!”);

· He supports barring “sexually promiscuous” homosexual men from giving blood;

· He cites “cross-dressing boutiques,” “bisexual clothing stores” and “multicolored-condom stores” as evidence that America has become a “degenerate nation.”





GLAAD News Media Director Cathy Renna also condemned MSNBC for hiring former House Majority Leader ##### Armey as a regular commentator, saying that Armey “consistently opposed equal rights for GLBT people while in office.”


"These programming changes threaten the journalistic credibility and the integrity of their network," Renna said.


Of course, GLAAD had high marks for Donahue, who has a long history of "gay" advocacy.


Regarding Savage, GLAAD cites his book Savage Nation, in which he blasts "degenerates on the left who want to sell Americans on the idea that homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality, even sex with animals is normal are using porn as a way to indoctrinate the sheeple ."


Savage Nation has been number one on The New York Times’ best-seller list for five weeks. You can e-mail Savage, who is also founder of the Paul Revere Society, at paulreversociety@yahoo.com


GLAAD's radical record

GLAAD itself crusades for “transgender” rights, which includes cross-dressing and transsexuality. In 2000, GLAAD sponsored a radical “True Spirit” conference outside Washington, D.C., for “female-to-male” girls and women - i.e., those who yearn to become “boyz.” Every year, the “True Spirit” conference draws medical doctors who hawk their “chest reconstruction” operations to the assembled girls who seek to be masculine. The operations involve cutting off their healthy breasts to appear flat-chested like men.


GLAAD also champions the mainstreaming of "gay" sexual perversions, such as two men kissing or engaging in anal sex, on television. GLAAD honored the Showtime drama Queer as Folk, which featured a story line involving a 29-year-old man who sodomizes a 17-year-old boy (see story in this issue).


Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s leading homosexual lobby group, has joined GLAAD in condemning Savage. HRC—which just sponsored the 2003 “True Spirit” conference (for "female-to-male" transgenders) held February 14-17 in Washington, D.C.— says that Savage uses “grossly inappropriate rhetoric.”


HRC also successfully lobbied for the tax-funded transsexual operations in San Francisco condemned by Savage.


GLAAD and HRC are honing in on Savage’s comments that he will urge the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the new “gay” campaign against him. The two organizations are portraying Savage as a threat to free speech, but many observers see the real threat to free speech coming from left-leaning groups like GLAAD, which believes there is no legitimate viewpoint other than theirs, which is that homosexuality is about “civil rights,” not morality.


Even open lesbian Tammy Bruce—author of The New Thought Police: Inside the Left’s Assault on Free Speech—has blasted GLAAD and other homosexual groups for their crusade against Dr. Laura Schlessinger. In the face of GLAAD’s high-profile media assault, Schlessinger scaled back her criticism of homosexuality and took out two ads in the Hollywood newspaper Variety apologizing to homosexuals. (Her TV show floundered amidst the controversy.)


Savage, in contrast, says that unlike Dr. Laura, he will not “kowtow or cater” to “gay” activists and will urge his 6 million radio listeners to defend him against their campaign to deny him the MSNBC slot.


Savage also is strongly opposed to radical feminism—he blasts America’s “she-ocracy”—unrestrained immigration, and radical Muslim activists who, he asserts, are coddled by the liberal media.


CWA President Sandy Rios applauded Savage for not backing down in the face of the “gay” lobby campaign.


“We may not always agree with the way he says it, but we’re glad he’s taking a stand,” she said.


The following is a nearly full transcript of GLAAD’s February release citing excerpts of allegedly offensive writings and audio remarks from Michael Savage (Note: GLAADNotes is a publication of GLAAD):



…From Michael Savage's column: "Will Dems Next Claim Ballot Machines Are Racist, Sexist and Homophobic?" — Nov. 27, 2000:
Were the ballot machines homophobic because some weak-wristed types had insufficient strength to press hard enough to register a vote? (This coming as close to them making anything pregnant for as long as they live.)


From Michael Savage's column: "Liberte, Equalite, Perversite: The New Whorled Order" — March 22, 2000:

Your children's future is what we're talking about, a matter of life and death for their future. The gay and lesbian mafia wants our children. If it can win their souls and their minds, it knows their bodies will follow. Of course, it wants to homosexualize the whole country, not just the children. This is all part of the war that is going on. Maybe you don't want to face up to it, but it's a very real war. It's being inflicted on the American people by the radical gay lobby, which is now everywhere.


GLAADnote: The above quote was later edited out of the original piece and renamed "Libertee, Equalite, Bigotre..." when it was chosen for inclusion in Savage's book, The Savage Nation.


The Savage Nation, p. 40:

The liberal agenda includes a world government that will not tolerate U.S. laws or interference; a single world military that could enter the United States at a whim and arrest you without due cause; a world court that will impose laws without the protections of the U.S. Constitution; world taxes, where our money will be seized and given to Third World countries; and a world religion that will probably be Gaia with the rainbow flag.*


The liberal agenda also includes the brain beating of your children, taking away your right to own guns, taking away private property, encouraging deviant sexual behavior, favoring plants and animals over human beings, and greatly expanding the "right " to kill the unborn.


*GLAADnote: Savage is referring to the LGBT community's flag, known as the "rainbow flag.”

[admin]

The Savage Nation, pp. 37-38:

Today in America, we have a "she-ocracy" where a minority of feminist zealots rule the culture. ... At the top of this hierarchy is Hillary Clinton, followed by others, such as Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sandra Day O'Conner on the U.S. Supreme Court; Barbara Boxer, the radical abortion supporter from California. ... Together they have both feminized and homosexualized much of America to the point where the nation has become passive, receptive, and masochistic.


In the new "she-ocracy," the overt target for every piece of legislation seems to be the white, heterosexual, taxpaying, working male. Recent hate-crime legislation, of course, was a payoff to the homosexual lobby pushed through Congress by those in the she-ocracy with deep ties to the House and Senate. The next step, of course, will be to go a step further in the hate-crime legislation to further feminize the white, heterosexual male.


The Savage Nation, p. 43:

When I compare our civilization to those who only maim and destroy, some people say, 'Michael, how dare you say that the West is superior to the East? How dare you say we're more civilized?' These thieves in dirty nightshirts have created nothing in a thousand years. Just check the tags on your clothing. Ever see a label, "Made in Iran" or "Made by the Taliban"? Of course not. They cut throats and blow things up. And that's it. But we're supposed to "be sensitive" and "understanding" of their multiculturalism.


The Savage Nation, pp. 41-42 ("Sex Changes in San Francisco"):

The unenlightened, provincial, “progressive” lemmings leading San Francisco have taken another giant leap backward in deciding to pay for sex-change surgery and all the “counseling” and hormone shots for “Tommys” who want to be 'Bettys' and for “Barbaras” who really want to be “Willys.”


"This is very much a civil rights issue," said one of the city's stupidvisors. "This is about equal benefits for equal work." Equating sexual insanity with race is a dangerous and demeaning precedent. There is no historical, anthropological, or medical evidence supporting such surgical insanity. Except for religious-inspired mutilation, had the ancients encountered a man holding a knife to his penis they would have restrained him as mad and constrained him to prevent such self-violence.


In Sico-Frisco, such insanity is now encouraged and is covered by the city's “health plan.” But changing sex is not cheap. For males changing to females, surgery costs about $37,000. For deranged females who wish to become males, the price is $77,000.


Radical socialists hope to propel this travesty. “This action will help lead to the elimination of discrimination against transgender people and hopefully will be a model for employers across the United States,” said one such socialist, a sort of “enforcer” for the San Francisco Human Rights Commission.


Currently only a handful of nations with socialized medicine offer this medical travesty of self-mutilation. Among them are the Netherlands, Denmark, and some Canadian provinces. The hypocrisy and outright thievery of scarce health benefits screams out from the headlines. Here we have the same phony “liberals” who hawk the need for 'prescription drugs for the elderly,' health care benefits for illegal aliens and poor children now robbing these needy citizens to serve a radical and insane fringe of self-mutilators. Under the guise of 'civil rights' and 'human rights,' we are being robbed as a society.


Excellence is replaced by expedience.


Moral purity is equated with utter decadence.


Today, we see those wishing to have themselves surgically mutilated equated with the great leaders of the civil rights movement, such as Martin Luther King.


I don't buy it. Nor should you.


All of these atrocities are at the root of why I believe America is well on her way from being the melting pot to becoming the chamber pot. We've lost our way because we've lost our view of our glorious past. Woodrow Wilson said it best:

“A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know what it is today, nor what it is trying to do. We are trying to do a futile thing if we do not know where we came from or what we have been about.”


Don't get me wrong. Although headed in that direction, America is not doomed to become a chamber pot. Her best days are in front of her—that is, if we have the guts to face the truth and then apply ourselves to repairing the foundation upon which this blessed nation was formed.


The Savage Nation, p. 75:

Every time America celebrates the National Day of Prayer, the atheists go out of their minds. They don't know what to do. Listen to them whine: “We believe in the separation of church and state. You have the right to pray—but you have no right to pray in public.


In the land of the free, the left wants you to hide all expressions of prayer.


You can have sex in public.


You can masturbate in public.


You can cross-dress in public. You can rub against a sheep in public.


But you can't pray in public. Prayer is disgusting! How dare you exhibit such a blatant disregard for Karl Marx.


In effect, the liberal says, 'If you want to go into a parade and dress up with whips and chains and beat each other up — fine! I've no problem with that. It's your business. It's your choice. But to pray in public is too offensive.'

That's how far we've fallen.

[admin]

The Savage Nation, p. 78 (on the Catholic Church sex-abuse crisis):

I'm not minimizing these inexcusable crimes. There's fundamentally nothing worse than hurting a child who trusts you. We all agree on that. However, you don't blame the entire church for the actions of boll weevils* who use the edifice in order to do their crimes.


Would we attack the institution of police because of a small number of corrupt cops? The left does!


*GLAADnote: His use of the term 'boll weevil' appears to be Savage's attempt to link pedophilia and other sexual predations with homosexuality, gay men and gay priests.





The Savage Nation, p. 79

Why don't we see the media demanding that some other world religions, which will remain unnamed at the moment, throw out their preachers who preach homicide from their pulpits? Why do we not see anything about, for example, the murderous mullahs who preach hatred and teach children to kill? Why don't we hear about that?


Because the radicals would like nothing more than to see the church steeples disappear and turn them into abortion clinics. The technique they're using is to stoke the flames of anti-Catholic bigotry in this country by pitting the Catholics against the Jews. ...


The Savage Nation, p. 95

Look what the unisex movement of the late sixties and early seventies brought us. Picture your kid. With a wave, he hops on the bus, lunch pail in hand. He's off to kindergarten. When he gets there, he sits in a circle and sings 'Old MacDonald had a farm' . Then, with much excitement, he waits for the teacher to speak. And speak she does. She applauds homosexual perversion. You say that couldn't happen? Well, you're wrong.


In California, teachers (starting with kindergarten) are being encouraged to teach that homosexuality, bisexuality—and even transsexuality—is normal behavior. As The Washington Times reported, the California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 2000 has been used to allow teachers “to talk openly about homosexuality” and “discuss their homosexual lifestyles with students during class.” Wake up, sheeple.


And this isn't just California. Elements inside the National Education Association have been trying to make this the NEA's official position for all schools across the country.


The Savage Nation, pp. 104-105 ("How to Pick up Liberal Women"):

Go to a bookstore. That's the place where most liberal women congregate, for reasons unknown. I don't know why books are associated with liberalism, but they are. There is, however, a specific way to pick up women in these bookstores.


You start at the magazine rack. Magazine buyers are easier to pick up than the book buyers. The book buyers are usually very mean. They're, like, real serious. They're there to buy a book and get out. That's it. Don't even look at them.

They're a waste of time.


But with magazine buyers, you have a chance. How do I know? Any women who's looking at a magazine is flirting. You start by sidling up to her. Don't make eye contact, guys, in the beginning, that is. When picking up a liberal woman, pretend that you don't know she's there. Just move closer and pick up a magazine on any topic near her.


It'd be useful if you can see what she's reading and then pick up one like it. That's always a bonding thing. But, I must warn you, if she's reading a lesbian magazine,


I would suggest that you leave that particular area immediately. If she's not reading a magazine on lesbian life, then OK, you continue.


Now, as you hold your magazine, carefully look for the glint in her eye - any hint that she's looking over at you with any interest. That's your moment to strike. But in sort of a roundabout way. You gotta act like a martial artist. You don't respond directly to her interest in you. Instead, pretend that you don't even notice her.


Then, reach across her face in a gentle manner for another magazine. Simply say, “Excuse me.” That's when you make eye contact. Do it as if you didn't even know she was there until that moment.


By saying, 'Excuse me,' you put yourself in a defeatist position right away. She will infer that you are a feminist man, and you're home free. You got it made.


That's the secret. The minute you say, “Excuse me," if she likes you, then you got it made. After that, the first thing you do is express a love for “people of coler,” all “people of cover,” even if they're mass murders.


Let her know that you love all gays even if they've raped young boys. It doesn't matter. As for alcoholics and all junkies, just say that you feel they're victims of a racist society. By now, you'll have her complete attention. Maybe suggest a latte and biscotti from the coffee shop. While you wait in line, attack our war on terror as a front from the globalist oil lobby. Then tell her immigrants are the strength of America.


That's it. You're over.


Savage Nation, pp. 88-89:

Listen to this, will you please, you liberals on medical marijuana who protest all that is good, wholesome, and pure. America has entered what I'd call the Mangled Century.


All you have to do is walk around an average mall to understand what a degenerate nation we've become and why I believe we are entering a troubled century.


Everywhere you turn you see a reflection of Jerry Springer's syndicated freak show. Look at the bisexual clothing stores.


Look at the cross-dressing boutiques.


Look at the multicolored-condom stores.


Look at the young mall rats rush to assume the latest Calvin Klein waif-on-drugs or Abercrombie & Fitch lesbo of the month club persona. I'm telling you, even Hugh Hefner would blush at what some of these merchants are selling kids. We have a society that has gone so backward we glorify the sickos.


If you're a junkie, you're better than the straight man.


If you molest boys, you're better than a Boy Scout.


If you're a criminal, you're better than a cop.


If you're a man of vice, you're better than a man of virtue.


If you're a pervert, you're better than the straight and narrow.


You get the picture? How did this happen? As I've said, liberalism is a mental disorder. You don't take the great men and then elevate them to where they should be. Instead, you take the low man and elevate them to where they shouldn't be."


Savage Nation, p. 111:

Such increased exposure of the general public to the HIV virus and other blood-borne microbes known to occur in the sexually promiscuous would multiply the death rate many times. Apparently this is overshadowed by gay sensitivities and the quest for gay votes. We are not to make them feel bad by discriminating against their blood-even if it threatens us and our loved ones.


Once again, we are told to stand by and let lunatics in positions of authority endanger public safety.


I'm convinced people like our undistinguished supervisor are of the same mentality as those who open our borders to diseased legal and illegal immigrants - a subject I'll explore in depth in the next chapter. They ruthlessly pursue their own agenda of power and corruption while they play hide-and-seek behind their so-called democratic causes—and the rest of us be damned.


Take Action

To help Michael Savage by urging MSNBC not to succumb to GLAAD's pressure campaign against him, see the adjoining story in this issue on how to write MSNBC.





Concerned Women for America
1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: (202) 488-7000
Fax: (202) 488-0806
E-mail: mail@cwfa.org



Christine

[admin]

Nuking the nuclear family
Posted: March 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Are you ready for the Second American Revolution? Joseph Farah's new book, "Taking America Back" exposes the weaknesses in America's current system and offers practical solutions – solutions that are real and doable, solutions that can revive freedom, morality and justice in our nation. Order your copy now in WorldNetDaily's online store, ShopNetDaily!



By Joseph Farah




© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Western Civilization would have been impossible without the nuclear family as the building block.

So, why is the family under attack like never before?

Because Western Civilization – and the entire notion of self-government that emerged from it – is the real target.

Destroying Western Civilization requires the elimination of the family structure, where parents are accountable to God and children are accountable to parents. This is happening today in innumerable ways:



by persuading us that "alternate lifestyles" are just as good as the institution of marriage;

by persuading us that the state should take the central role in educating children;

by persuading us that the killing of unborn children is a valid choice for pregnant women, one that should even be supported by tax subsidies;

by persuading us that both parents should work;

by persuading us that even small children develop just as well when cared for by strangers in group situations as they do when raised by parents;

by sexualizing our children at younger and younger ages;

by convincing us that there's nothing we can do about the increasingly high divorce rate in this country and that divorce doesn't necessarily hurt children;

To listen to the advocates of same-sex marriages, you would believe that homosexuals are being denied their civil rights because they cannot marry one another. The fact that such a notion is even being entertained in the media and in public policy debates today illustrates just how demented our culture has become.

For a moment, let's wave a magic wand and pretend we can actually grant the same-sex marriage advocates their wish. Bippity-bobboty-boo. Poof! Same-sex marriages are now legal. Marriage is no longer an institution between one man and one woman. Now women can marry women and men can marry men.

Why stop there?

After all, the same-sex marriage advocates tell us the only reason marriage remains an institution for heterosexual couples is because of archaic religious ideas. If those ideas – the very foundation of Western Civilization – are going out the window, then on to the next taboo.

What about marriage between brothers and sisters? Fathers and daughters? Mothers and sons? Brothers and brothers? Any problems yet?

The standard reply you get when you pose this challenge to the same-sex marriage advocates is that you are being absurd – there's just no demand out there for such unions. To which I say: So what? There was no demand for same-sex marriages just a few years ago. Surely there are people in the world who wish very sincerely to follow their hearts and form marital unions such as those described above. You can probably see them on daytime television right now.

Furthermore, is it simply market demand that makes such unions right? When enough people no longer feel squeamish about incest, will it be time to break down those barriers?

Let's go a step further. Since marriage is no longer an institution exclusively joining one woman with one man, isn't it time to reconsider polygamy?

How can we, in good conscience, tell a man who sincerely wants five wives he can't have them. It's part of his makeup. It's who he is. He was born that way with a predilection against monogamy. Can you stifle his rights and those of his consenting would-be adult wives?

But, then again, why limit these unions to adults? Isn't that just part of that old archaic religious notion that only adults should experience the pleasures of marriage? Why shouldn't children be allowed to marry? Isn't that age discrimination?

Which brings us back to where we started. The only taboo left at that point will be marriages outside the species. How can we deny a man or woman the right to form a domestic partnership with a domestic animal? It's just not right. It's unconstitutional.

You see, we're losing common sense when we sanction homosexual marriages. To do so is to redefine marriage. If homosexuals want to get together and create a new institution that celebrates their love and commitment to one another, they are free to do that. Let's just not call it marriage, because that changes the definition of a word and a sacred 5,000-year-old institution.

What's the definition of a family? Quite simple. It is two or more people living together related by marriage, blood or adoption. This is why the homosexual activists are so eager to legitimize homosexual marriages and homosexual adoptions. If they are successful, they will no longer have to destroy the family. It will have been destroyed by redefinition.

We'll never be successful at "Taking America Back" unless we use the nuclear family as the building block – just as our founders did.


Joseph Farah's nationally syndicated column originates at WorldNetDaily, where he serves as editor and chief executive officer. If you would like to see the column in your local newspaper, contact your local editor. Tell your paper the column is available through Creators Syndicate.

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31337

Christine

[admin]

'Two Moms' – advice you should run from!
Posted: March 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Dr. Laura Schlessinger





© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

I tell you there are times I take a call on my radio show, and it reverberates – not only in my brain, but also in my gut. I had a call recently that upset me.

It was from the mother of a 14-year-old girl who was getting hit on by a senior in high school – and mom thought that was just fine! It didn't seem to occur to her that a 17- or 18-year-old boy has certain expectations about dating that might put all kinds of pressure on her young daughter – pressure that she would find it hard to resist since the boy is so much more experienced and because she wants his approval. Duh!

This call came just before I interviewed authors Dr. Judith Reisman and Tammy Bruce about Planned Parenthood's new teen website that directs children toward wanton sexual acting out, totally divorced from any context such as a commitment to love and marriage. Our kids are surrounded by all these messages. They need their parents to exert their authority in the other direction to protect them from the dire consequences of too-early sexual behavior.

A few days later, when I read a column sent to me by a fan, this whole subject again riled my consciousness.

The article in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel is called "Ask Two Moms." As far as I am concerned, Amy Campbell Gray and Liz Letterman Fine tore up their mother cards when they wrote this column. I am horrified these two women have a forum to influence parents to be irresponsible, neglectful and react inappropriately to their children's budding sexuality.

A dad wrote the following to their column: "Dear Two Moms, I caught my 11-year-old girl making out with her classmate. I freaked, grounded her and called his parents. Did I overreact? How should I handle it?"

Here's their answer: "Oh dear, a parent's worst nightmare! How dare our children become sexually active! Haven't they heard about world overpopulation? What's wrong with abstinence until 40? Why rush these things? Good gracious, our little girl is growing up."

These women respond sarcastically to a father's anxiety – talking about population levels, making fun of abstinence and suggesting that being 11 years old is grown up and old enough to be experimenting with sexual behavior. And they have a job, writing a parenting column for a newspaper in America! I find this terrifying.

They go on to say, "You should have remained calm, said excuse me and left the room. Once the boy is gone, you can have a calm and loving talk with your daughter. The talk would consist of you reinforcing that you love her and that what she did is normal."

Yes, sexual behavior is normal – but utterly inappropriate for an 11-year-old child! What planet are these women living on? And, by the way, how is the boy going to be "gone"? If dad doesn't tell him to leave, is he going to just disappear? If it's OK for an 11-year-old to "make out" with a classmate, what's OK for a 12-year-old? 13-year-old? Unfortunately, we know the answer to these questions.

As a psychotherapist listening to many people over many years who have rigorously exercised their sexual freedom in this "enlightened" age of ours, the sex is exciting when they first get involved. But, after a while, because the act is only physical and has no meaning, they begin to feel bad about themselves and turn off to sex altogether. Some people solve it by going from one new partner to another, searching for that initial excitement. But these are not people who report that they are happy and well adjusted.

It's not a matter of being negative about sex. Rather, it's a matter of being very positive about sex and wanting people to have a wonderful and fulfilling sex life that goes way beyond the mechanics. So I disdain the South Florida Sun-Sentinel for setting these women up as experts. They are hurting the parents and children they are supposed to be helping. I just hope that poor dad – who acted totally appropriately in the situation – didn't swallow their bitter advice and got support from his family, his fellow dads, and/or his church for his anything but "overreaction"!


Dr. Laura Schlessinger is the best-selling author of books focused on successful relationships, parenting ideas, morality and personal ethics. She may be contacted by fax at (818)461-5140, or by writing: Dr. Laura Schlessinger; P.O. Box 8120; Van Nuys, CA 91409.


This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31338

Christine