Thursday, August 24, 2006

Knight: Despite Claims, Pension Reform Not Endorsement of 'Alternative Family Lifestyles'

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

When he signed the Pension Provision Act of 2006 into law last week, President Bush called it the "most sweeping reform of U.S. pension laws" in more than three decades. Part of the provision under the new law allows anyone inheriting retirement account funds to roll it over into an IRA and avoid a huge tax bill. That change is being trumpeted by homosexual "couples" and those who live together as a triumph for their cause -- but that's not quite true, says a spokesman for one pro-family organization.
Simply by default, the new changes apply to anyone -- friend or relative -- and any couple, regardless of marriage status or gender. "Non-spousal beneficiaries," the law calls them; and pro-homosexual groups see awarding of this benefit, heretofore reserved for married couples, as a nod of approval in their direction.
The Human Rights Campaign, the largest pro-homosexual lobby in the United States, is among the groups touting the pension reform and claims a major role in its inclusion of key provisions that benefit the "gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans-sexual" (GLBT) community. "In a challenging political climate," says HRC president Joe Solmonese, "we persevered and helped to secure critical federal protections that will make difficult times for domestic partners a little easier." He told the San Francisco Chronicle it is the first change in the tax code to help same-sex couples.
But Bob Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute at Concerned Women for America, says alternative lifestyle groups are looking for anything they can call a victory. "Certainly, the homosexual activists probably had a hand in lobbying for it," he acknowledges. "But if you look at the provision, it's so general that in no way could they claim that it's the government blessing same-sex relationships."
Knight contends that recent defeats at the ballot box and in court rulings are two reasons why proponents of alternative family relationships are claiming a victory in this case.
"The homosexual activists have taken it on the chin lately, with 20 states enacting marriage amendments and seven courts -- actually eight now -- striking down their challenges to marriage laws," he points out. "They've been losing across the board, so I'm not surprised if they'll want to claim this as a gay victory when in effect it's really far more general than that."
It is a real stretch, says Knight, for anyone to claim the pension reform is a government blessing of same-sex partner benefits. "It's not the government saying, 'Okay, now we're going to recognize same-sex relationships just like marriage,'" he comments. "It's not like that at all."
Instead, Knight thinks legislators simply chose to change legal requirements to reflect a culture which is experiencing deterioration of commitment to traditional marriage and family. "Overall, I'd say it's not a good change if you care about the health of marriage because it disincentivizes marriage," he offers. "On the other hand, it reflects the growing reality of never-married, divorced, and cohabiting people."
The CFI spokesman says the new law is an unfortunate acknowledgment that, with a drop in the number of traditional marriages taking place, there is no longer a broad expectation for retirement funds to go to marriage spouses of those who have died.
Why hasn't the radical homosexual community embraced the Benefits Fairness Act, which is an alternative to most of the rights that they are screaming for? The act recognizes that there are relationships that are ineligible for marriage but who nevertheless would benefit from a status similar to a next-of-kin status.
The whole concept of "second class citizenry" is the typical answer to the act. Why is it that the pro-marriage, pro-family advocates can bend to try and come to a middle ground on the issue of marriage but the radical gay community cannot? Has the pro-gay "marriage" sponsors ever engaged in conducting a citizen initiated petition to put gay "marriage" in the law books? No. Has the radical homosexual community ever come to some common ground with pro-marriage advocates in terms of suggesting or writing up a proposal that would please both sides of the fence on this issue? No.
It seems that the radical gay community only promotes for the destruction of marriage and family. This is strongly suggested in many comments by leading homosexual advocates of gay “marriage”:
“The trick is, gay leaders and pundits must stop watering the issue down – this is simply about equality for gay couples – and offer same-sex marriage for what it is: an opportunity to reconstruct a traditionally homophobic institution by bringing it to our more equitable queer value system…a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture…”
-Michelangelo Signorile, OUT magazine, May 1996, pp. 30, 32.
An article in OUT magazine quotes Mr. Signorile again on the question of the virtue of marriage and monogamy and pushes this quote as a normal opinion from a typical gay man:
“As far as the legalities and financial aspects, yes, I’d definitely get married. But would that make me monogamous? No way. I think it’s silly for anyone, straight or gay, to define it that way.”
- Signorile, OUT magazine, May 1996, p. 113.
“I think it’s possible to love more than one person and have more than one partner…In our case, we have an open marriage.”
-Jonathan Yarbrough: The first gay man along with his partner Cody Rogahn to get a same-sex marriage license in MA. who spoke to the press just before his wedding in Provincetown, Massachusetts, on May 17, 2004 (Franci Richardson, “P’town Ready for the ‘Big Day,’” Boston Herald, May 17, 2004.)
Just in today’s Boston Globe there is the continued advocation for the use of no fault divorce but for homosexual couples whose “marriages” have “dissolved”.
One question I would like to ask Ms. Robinson is how are same-sex relationships the same as heterosexual relationships besides “sometimes they last, sometimes they don’t”?
Why is it that the destructive outcomes of no fault divorce need to be “installed” into a community that does not, for the most part, even adhere to the values of traditional marriage in the first place?

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Democrats Help Block Marriage Protection Amendment

Party goes on record in support of homosexual marriage

Activists pushing for legalizing homosexual marriage say they will not stop with just homosexual marriage. They demand more. They want government and societal acceptance, approval and financial support for many kinds of relationships, including polygamy.
Activists say that marriage is "not the only worthy form of family or relationship," and it "should not be legally or economically privileged above others." The statement was signed by 270 homosexual rights activists and heterosexual allies.
Other kinds of relationships that they say deserve marriage-like benefits include "committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner (polygamy)" and "queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households." The goal of the activists is the destruction of traditional marriage.
The Democratic National Committee has developed plans to help the homosexual activists achieve their goal. DNC spokesman Danien LaVera says the DNC has developed a five-point plan to help homosexuals block any legislation which prohibits homosexual marriage, and to push homosexual marriage.
The first successful effort by the Democrats occurred in Illinois where the Democrats donated $10,000 to help the activists keep the marriage protection law off the ballot in that state.
LaVera said the DNC strongly opposes efforts to ban homosexual marriage by amending the federal or state constitutions and that the Democratic party plans to step up efforts to promote pro-homosexual marriage bills in several states.
Democratic parties in eight states have already adopted platforms endorsing homosexual marriage bills. They include New York, California, Washington, Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Massachusetts and Hawaii.
Here is the 5-point plan LaVera said the Democratic National Committee has developed to fight for homosexual marriage:
  • Labeling efforts to ban homosexual marriage as "divisive" ploys by the Republicans and others to deflect voter attention from other important issues, including "the Bush's administration's failed policies."
  • Begin a "party-building" operation which includes specific training for state Democratic operatives in all 50 states on how to campaign against ballot measures banning homosexual marriage.
  • Working closely with the gay group National Stonewall Democrats to "develop strategy and talking points' to combat state measures defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.
  • Working cooperatively with homosexual organizations fighting ballot measures in each state where they surface, providing campaign advice, expertise, and logistical and financial support.
  • Empowering and organizing homosexual communities around the country with the help of the DNC's new homosexual outreach organizer Brian Bond.

    Take Action

    1. Sign the NO HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE pledge. Officials of both parties will be notified of the number who sign the pledge. We will not provide either party with your name or email address.
    2. Please forward this email to friends and family alerting them about the plans of the Democratic party to help legalize homosexual marriage and abolish the traditional family.

    Click Here to Sign the Pledge Now!

    News from the American Family Association

Monday, August 14, 2006

The Misfits

"I wanted him to be a kid who sees himself as cool, who sees nothing wrong with being attracted to the boy who sits next to him in art class as opposed to the girl on the other side of him."

This is a direct quote from an Interview with James Howe author of "The Misfits". This book is geared towards middle school aged children, which for the most part are grades 7 and 8. So, we are talking about 12 - 13 year old school children.
The "him" in the opening quote is a character by the name of Joe who is an openly gay 7th grader. Joe, according to Mr. Howes, is a reflection of himself as a boy. Mr. Howes now as an adult is gay and it is not clear how or when he thought he chose to be gay. In another interview by Scholastic students Mr. Howe admits to marrying a women and having a child. His wife Debbie is described as his "late wife Debbie" which could mean many things. Mr. Howe could of lost his wife Debbie to an illness/accident, ect and then decided to act on his closeted boy-aged gay behavior after his loss or he could of divorced his wife due to the "lies" he was living in as a gay man married to a women or whatever the case may of been. The point here is Mr. Howe admits to being part of a traditional marriage and then acting on his gay behavior that was the result of whatever stressor in his life. Why did he decide to continue with this behavior after his "late wife Debbie" left him via the potential circumstances as described above? Why does he know need to promote and cohersively indoctrinate these "values" onto 12-year-old children?
Mr. Howe also introduces attraction, starting to date, and love in "The Misfits. Are these adult themes really appropriate for the schoolhouse curriculum? Have the "government run indoctrination camps (public schools)" ever advocated for and TAUGHT about attraction, dating and love to 12 year olds? Yes, the students talk about it amongst themselves in the halls but has it EVER been TAUGHT via books and stories? I mean, how much more agenda driven diversity lessons do our children need in order to graduate? Why is diversity and tolerance taught in the schools in the first place? Isn't that up to the parents of the children?
And yes of course there is a sequel to "The Misfits" that Mr. Howe is working on where the same characters go to the 8th grade.
"The Misfits", among other books written by Mr. Howe, are listed on the Great Books for Gay Teens website. A lot of Mr. Howe's work does not DIRECTLY deal with a homosexual theme as some deal with gender identity and how to deal with loss and challenges in life. These are good themes but a way to "warm-up" to younger readers to bait and hook their minds for his agenda driven gay "teachings" provided in his other works.
Look out for “The Misfits” in your child’s book bag this Fall. Already I have found out this book is going to be required reading at Melrose Middle School this upcoming school year. I will post more schools in the Massachusetts area as I engage in further research on the topic.

Friday, August 11, 2006

78 Dealers Ask Ford to Stop Supporting the Homosexual Agenda

Photobucket - Video and Image HostingGreat news! Read the dealer's letter to Bill Ford before you continue.

Ford sales have consistently dropped since AFA began the boycott. The drop in March was 5%, April 7%, May 2%, June 6.8%, and July 4.1%.
Ford has made yet another donation to a homosexual group pushing homosexual marriage. And they continued supporting homosexual marriage with ads in two homosexual publications—The Advocate and OUT.
Ford is listed by Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) as being a "Topaz" sponsor of PFLAG. PFLAG did not identify the specific amount required to be a Topaz sponsor, perhaps because they did not want the amount made public. Nevertheless, it requires a considerable sum to be a PFLAG "Topaz" sponsor.
Here is the policy statement from PFLAG: "PFLAG supports revision of federal and state statutes to extend to persons in same-gender committed relations the right to marry with the full legal rights and benefits, as well as responsibilities and obligations." PFLAG is a leader in promoting the pro-homosexual agenda and legalizing homosexual marriage.
Ford obviously agreed with the goal of PFLAG to legalize homosexual marriage, else they would not have made the donation to help PFLAG.
When Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX), an organization helping homosexuals come out of the homosexual lifestyle, asked Ford for a grant, Ford refused. In fact, in our research AFA did not find that Ford gave a donation of any amount to any organization helping those who want out of the homosexual lifestyle. Ford says they are committed to diversity, but their definition of diversity is evidently confined to supporting only pro-homosexual organizations.
Ford continued their support of the homosexual lifestyle by advertising in the August, 2006 issues of both The Advocate and OUT. They placed a full page ad in OUT and two full pages in The Advocate. Ford has been supporting homosexual media with advertising for years.
What kind of material is Ford supporting? Here is the front cover of The Advocate along with one of the Ford ads. The pictorial contents inside the magazines are so offensive that we could not include them in this mailing. Here are some titles of the articles in the magazines: Is Porn An Option, At Your Service (male escort), The Book Of Lesbian Love, Five Sex Tips For Gay Men, Five Sex Tips For Lesbians, and Private D--K In A Hard Place.
According to the Detroit Free Press, Ford "donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to homosexual groups, sponsors gay pride parades, and holds mandatory diversity training..."
Take Action
  • Forward this email to your local Lincoln, Mercury, Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mazda or Ford dealer (all owned by Ford). Find their email address here (click on the auto icon). Ask him to forward it on to Chairman Bill Ford, the one person who can stop Ford's financial support of homosexual organizations.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Just for Laughs!

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Get your Free Guestbook from