On Feb 12, 2007, the Desert Dispatch reported that Barstow High School now has a “GSA” (“gay”-straight alliance). The article notes that initially no teacher was willing to sponsor the group until English teacher Rebekah Michelson unfortunately agreed to serve. Richard Reeb, former Barstow College professor and blogger for The Claremont Institute, penned the following response to the story…

——————————–

Excerpted from Barstow High School Needs to Think Twice About Gay Club, by Richard Reeb, published Wed Feb 14, 2007, in Desert Dispatch:

…This week we learn that advocates of homosexuality, under the guise of protecting students with real or imagined inclinations in that direction against school yard bullies and “intolerance” generally, are forming a gay club at Barstow High.

Notwithstanding the purported popularity of these groups on California’s high school campuses, it is a mistake to permit those pushing sexual perversion on our state to exploit the innocence of high school students and the misguided “tolerance” of Barstow High School teachers and administrators.

…The new club’s prospective faculty advisor made a remarkable statement that captures the ambiguity – and the dangers – of introducing young persons in the throes of raging hormones to an unnatural way of life.

“They’re unformed clay, and they’re trying to figure out who they are and how they want to live,” she said. “My goal is to provide a safe environment where kids can be social.”

Now if these Barstow teenagers are “unformed clay,” what sense does it make to encourage them to reject the example and the precepts of their parents and their society, and to experiment with ideas and (inevitably) practices which can confuse them pretty thoroughly? We are constantly told that our teenaged children are “sexually active,” whether their parents know or approve or not, so steering them toward same-sex intimacy in theory means encouraging it in practice.

Also noteworthy is the guiding hand of Carolyn Laub, founder and executive director of the Gay-Straight Alliance Network, a California-based nonprofit umbrella group for GSAs around the state. This puts the lie to the claim that the students themselves were somehow the instigators of club formation. Ms. Laub says she has formed 600 clubs at more than 40 percent of California high schools. Barstow finally got “discovered.”

We know that advocates or enablers of sexual perversion, which they euphemistically refer to as “diversity,” mean for their fellow citizens not merely to “tolerate” it but to “celebrate” it. After all, from their point of view, they have nothing to apologize for. Indeed, critics of their “lifestyle” are the ones who have some explaining to do. Nothing but bigotry or religious fanaticism could possibly explain opposition to our public schools sanctioning “gayness.”

It is amazing that Laud and other professional advocates cite the federal Equal Access Act in support of their right to form gay clubs on high school campuses. But we should remind ourselves that the actual origin of that act, signed by President Clinton, was to protect the rights of religious organizations to meet on campus after gay clubs had already formed.

…In plain words, gay clubs are part of a movement which is not only pushing homosexuality on vulnerable teenagers but openly hostile to Christian groups that still follow the Biblical teaching that homosexuality is an “abomination.” Their object is not to strike a blow for free speech but to eradicate from public discourse the viewpoint that homosexuality is morally wrong.

That is the “ball game.” …Today’s “uncloseted” homosexual advocates and practitioners will not rest until all of us agree that denying the distinctive sexual wellsprings of our nature is right and maintenance of traditional marriage and family is wrong.

It is too bad that Barstow Unified School District trustees have given sanction to this “gay” club. Parents should register their protests and take advantage of what moral virtue still remains in this community to stop the club in its tracks.

Dr. Richard Reeb taught political science, philosophy and journalism at Barstow College from 1970 to 2003. He is the author of “Taking Journalism Seriously: ‘Objectivity’ as a Partisan Cause” (University Press of America, 1999).

From Top Law Firms Undergo a Rainbow Revolution, by Vivia Chen, The American Lawyer, March 2, 2007, as re-published in Law.com:

In his famous dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas’s same-sex sodomy law, Antonin Scalia railed against the legal profession for embracing the “anti-antihomosexual culture.” Well, Scalia got that right.

Not only are the nation’s elite law firms not anti-gay, they are putting out the lavender welcome mat. Perks that seemed radical just 10 years ago are now standard fare at Am Law 200 firms: health care benefits for domestic partners, nondiscrimination pledges and sponsorship of gay organizations. Firms are also stampeding to recruit candidates at gay job fairs. And according to a survey by gay rights organization Human Rights Campaign, the legal profession ranks high in gay-friendliness when compared to other industries.

Continue reading at Law.com

A followup to AFTAH’s exclusive special report on Out & Equal’s radical agenda…

From the Out & Equal website:

Out & Equal Workplace Advocates is proud to display our ever-increasing list of corporations who support LGBT workplace equality by encouraging and fostering their own employee resource groups (ERGs). With such valuable workplace groups in place, employees in one ERG can turn to leaders in other groups to share resources and establish good workplace practices for LGBT employees. LGBT employees trust their employers are keeping their interests in mind when making key business decisions that affect all employees…

True Out & Equal Workplace Leaders

TAKE ACTION — Pass this article forward to the executives at your company and contact your elected officials in Washington, D.C. (Congressional switchboard: 202-224-3121) to express opposition to the “ENDA Our Freedom” Bill. (ENDA is the pro-homosexual, pro-“transgender” Employment Non-Discrimination Act.) Also, call President Bush at 202-456-1111 or 456-1414 and ask him to veto any and all pro-homosexual bills that emerge from the Democrat-led Congress.

AN Americans For Truth EXCLUSIVE SPECIAL REPORT

Amy Andre, program manager for Out & Equal, presented a workshop at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force’s Creating Change conference, November 8-12, 2006, in Kansas City, Missouri, entitled 15 Steps to an Out & Equal Workplace. (AFTAH’s reporters went undercover at the conference because the Task Force ejects critical observers at its events.)

One key initiative revealed by Andre: the promotion of a “spousal equivalency policy” that would require employers to pay homosexuals a higher salary than married heterosexuals.

These are the steps that homosexual activists are recommending for American corporations (our comments are in bold and italics):

(1) Support and attend the annual Out & Equal “Workplace Summit”

(2) Start an “employee resource group” — This employee group will be used to pressure the company to complete the remaining steps.

(3) Offer domestic partner benefits — O&E supports domestic partner benefits for cohabitating heterosexuals as well as homosexual partners.

(4) Include “sexual orientation” in your company’s EEO policy — Such a policy would prevent the company from “discriminating against” homosexuals or bisexuals.

(5) Include “gender identity and expression” in your company’s EEO policy — This policy would prevent an employer from “discriminating against” a transvestite (cross-dresser) or transsexual (who might be considering a “sex change” operation or might be partially or completely “transitioned”), even if this situation creates a problem with clients. (For example, these policies have been used to ensure that a teacher who cross-dresses or proceeds with a “sex-change” operation cannot be fired. Instead, children are expected to understand and cope with this outrageous situation.)

(6) Include LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] workplace diversity training — “Knowing someone who is LGBT changes attitudes” so O&E recommends having the trainer or another employee “come out” during the session — a manipulative tactic.

(7) Support the LGBT community through corporate giving — Although homosexual activists generally express disdain for corporate America, executives are urged to contribute money to promote the normalization of homosexuality.

(8) Recruit and develop LGBT employees

(9) Market to the LGBT community

(10) Create LGBT-specific advertising

(11) Provide LGBT leadership development opportunities

(12) Develop spousal equivalent policies for LGBT employees — See below — this one is very important.

(13) Include LGBT-owned businesses in your supplier diversity program — O&E recommends the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce’s certification program. This policy results in business moving from family-oriented companies to pro-homosexual companies. (Case in point: Wal-Mart.)

(14) Promote an LGBT-friendly corporate culture

(15) Share best practices around LGBT workplace issues

Out & Equal convinces companies that homosexuals comprise both a vital source of talent and a uniquely attractive target market segment. Using data from Witeck-Combs, a pro-homosexual firm, O&E suggests that homosexuals comprise 6 to 7 percent of the population. (Their number far exceeds more scientific estimates that put the figure at 1-3 percent.)

Using their inflated numbers, O&E says the 14 to 16 million homosexuals will spend about $640 billion in 2006. They report that homosexuals are twice as likely to be professionals or managers, are early adopters of new technologies, are brand loyal, and have a higher discretionary income. That enticement, along with a little “social justice” guilt, deceives companies into implementing O&E recommended policies.

First, a corporation would incur additional expense to fund “domestic partner” benefits. Most corporations contribute a substantial portion toward the cost of an employee’s personal health care and some toward the cost of coverage for an employee plus spouse or employee plus spouse/children. O&E recommends that an employer make that same contribution for those who are not married — for instance, a live-in boyfriend/girlfriend or a homosexual partner.

Homosexual “Spousal Supremacy”?
Next, Out & Equal’s “spousal equivalency policy” would require the employer to compensate the homosexual employee for the absence of tax exemption on homosexual partner and children health insurance costs. An employee normally makes a contribution, deducted from his paycheck, toward the cost of his health care coverage. For a married man, that expense is paid with pre-tax or tax-exempt dollars. Because there is no federal recognition of “gay marriage,” although a homosexual may receive domestic partner benefits, his contribution is paid with taxable dollars.

In the example Ms. Andre used (and she did note that the figures would vary according to each unique circumstance), she estimated that the employer would need to pay a homosexual employee with a partner $3787.20/year extra to compensate for the different tax status; that figure would soar to $7006.32/year for a homosexual with a partner and children. The net effect of this concept would be to pay a homosexual with a “partner” thousands of dollars more than a married heterosexual.

And add to that the cost of employee time spent networking, calling or e-mailing, meeting to focus on their “victim” status, lobbying HR/management, etc.

Executives would do well to examine Eastman Kodak, Ford, and Wal-Mart as case studies and to note the negative effect of capitulating to GLBT demands — on corporate revenue, volume, and stock price.

Or they could simply heed the words of one (white, female) activist in a separate Task Force Creating Change session, who expressed disdain for American corporations and said:

“…I am happy to take the white man’s money
and use it to subvert [everything he stands for].”

Out & Equal’s 2007 Workplace Summit will be held September 27-29 at the Hilton in Washington, D.C. Human Resource executives would do well to take their calculators along.

If you read only one article about the homosexual agenda this year, make this be the one. It describes homosexual activist and Quark founder Tim Gill‘s stealth strategy of targeting pro-family, Republican state legislators for defeat by funneling “gay” donors’ money to these candidates’ opponents. The plan worked and the result is that states like Iowa are now facing a burst of pro-“gay” legislation fueled in part by out-of-state checks — about which the average citizen knows nothing.

We don’t imagine that The Atlantic Monthly’s editors would be quite so upbeat about this story if it were about secret donations from evangelical moneymen targeting pro-homosexual state legislators. But now is not the time for sour grapes. Instead, we need concerted action to stop this sneaky plot from succeeding in the form of new “sexual orientation” laws.

One more thing: isn’t it telling that Patrick Guerriero, the former head of the national Log Cabin Republicans — a group dedicated to advancing homosexual interests in the GOP — took a job to help achieve Democratic takeovers of state capitols? More proof that the Log Cabin activists are homosexuals first, and Republicans second. After all, this is the same “Republican” group that refused to endorse President Bush for re-election because he supported a Federal Marriage Amendment (horrors!). And yet there are still plenty of “moderate” Republicans who insist that the key to the party’s success is tilting more toward the Log Cabins and away from the GOP’s conservative, religious base. — Peter LaBarbera

——————————

The following is excerpted from They Won’t Know What Hit Them, by Joshua Green, published March 2007 in Atlantic Monthly:

The software mogul Tim Gill has a mission:
Stop the Rick Santorums of tomorrow before they get started.
How a network of gay political donors is stealthily
fighting sexual discrimination and reshaping American politics.

…Danny Carroll, the Republican speaker pro tempore of Iowa’s House of Representatives, …was among the dozens of targets of a group of rich gay philanthropists who quietly joined forces last year, under the leadership of a reclusive Colorado technology mogul, to counter the tide of antigay politics in America that has generated, among other things, a succession of state ballot initiatives banning gay marriage.

Like many other state legislatures last year, Iowa’s was narrowly divided. …If Democrats took control of the House and Senate, however narrowly, the initiative would die, and with it the likelihood of further legislation limiting civil rights for gays and lesbians…

Over the summer, Carroll’s opponent started receiving checks from across the country—significant sums for a statehouse race, though none so large as to arouse suspicion (the gifts topped out at $1,000). Because they came from individuals and not from organizations, nothing identified the money as being “gay,” or even coordinated. Only a very astute political operative would have spotted the unusual number of out-of-state donors and pondered their interest in an obscure midwestern race. And only someone truly versed in the world of gay causes would have noticed a $1,000 contribution from Denver, Colorado, and been aware that its source, Tim Gill, is the country’s biggest gay donor, and the nexus of an aggressive new force in national politics…

Tim Gill is best known as the founder of the publishing-software giant Quark Inc., and for a long time was one of the few openly gay members of the Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans…In 2000, he sold his interest in Quark for a reported half-billion dollars in order to focus full-time on his philanthropy.

Gill’s principal interest is gay equality. His foundations have given about $115 million to charities. His serious involvement in politics is a more recent development, though geared toward the same goal. In 2000, he gave $300,000 in political donations, which grew to $800,000 in 2002, $5 million in 2004, and a staggering $15 million last year, almost all of it to state and local campaigns…

“My goal is to see that all Americans are treated equally regardless of sexuality,” he told me when we met.

…Gill decided to find out how he could become more effective and enlisted as his political counselor an acerbic lawyer and former tobacco lobbyist named Ted Trimpa, who is Colorado’s answer to Karl Rove. Trimpa believes that the gay-rights community directs too much of its money to thoroughly admirable national candidates who don’t need it, while neglecting less compelling races that would have a far greater impact on gay rights—a tendency he calls “glamour giving.” Trimpa cited the example of [a prominent, Democratic presidential candidate]: an attractive candidate, solid on gay rights, and viscerally exciting to donors. It feels good to write him a check. An analysis of [the candidate’s] 2004 Senate race, which he won by nearly fifty points, had determined that gays contributed more than $500,000. “The temptation is always to swoon for the popular candidate,” Trimpa told me, “but a fraction of that money, directed at the right state and local races, could have flipped a few chambers. ‘Just because he’s cute’ isn’t a strategy.”

Together, Gill and Trimpa decided to eschew national races in favor of state and local ones, which could be influenced in large batches and for much less money. Most antigay measures, they discovered, originate in state legislatures. Operating at that level gave them a chance to “punish the wicked,” as Gill puts it—to snuff out rising politicians who were building their careers on antigay policies, before they could achieve national influence. Their chief cautionary example of such a villain is Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who once compared homosexuality to “man on dog” sex (and was finally defeated last year, at a cost of more than $20 million)…

Gill’s idea was to identify vulnerable candidates like Danny Carroll and move quickly to eliminate them without the burden of first having to win the consent of some risk-averse large organization or board of directors. Another element of this strategy is stealth. Revealing targets only after an election makes it impossible for them to fight back…

In the 2006 elections, on a level where a few thousand dollars can decide a close race, Gill’s universe of donors injected more than $3 million, providing in some cases more than 20 percent of a candidate’s or organization’s budget. On Election Day, fifty of the seventy targeted candidates were defeated, Danny Carroll among them; and out of the thirteen states where Gill and his allies invested, four — Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Washington — saw control of at least one legislative chamber switch to the Democratic Party… Gill’s stealth campaign was both effective and precedent-setting. For the first time, in a broad and organized way, gays had taken the initiative in a sweeping multistate strategy and had mostly prevailed.

Excerpted from UCLA Gets $1 Million to Study Legal Topics Involving Gay Couples, published Feb 26, 2007, by Associated Press:

A gay couple who hope to marry one day has donated more than $1 million to the University of California, Los Angeles, to fund research on legal topics involving same-sex relationships.

The gift announced Friday from John McDonald and Rob Wright will support what is described as the nation’s first endowed academic chair in sexual orientation law.

The two say they want to promote objective [?] research, but they also hope to aid the campaign for gay marriage and other gay rights issues…

Continue reading at Associated Press…

Note just how “objective” they are:

• This is not McDonald and Wright’s first gift to UCLA designed to promote homosexuality in American culture.

• McDonald and Wright are also benefactors of the public television newsmagazine In the Life which publicizes various aspects of the homosexual lifestyle.

Parents, please be aware that Abercrombie & Fitch also owns abercrombie, Hollister, and Ruehl 925.

From the homosexual activist organization Human Rights Campaign, posted Dec 19, 2006:

Joins Top Companies for GLBT Equality

HRC is pleased to announce that four more companies have achieved a perfect score of 100 percent for their workplace policies for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees. Abercrombie & Fitch, Ameriprise, Brinker International and The Walt Disney Co. have received updated scores of 100 percent following the publication of our corporate report card, the Corporate Equality Index.

“We are proud to count Abercrombie & Fitch and the others among more than 140 American corporations that fully support all their employees,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese. “By achieving the top score, these companies have demonstrated a commitment to their employees and to all Americans who support fairness and equality.”

You might recall that Tyrone Hanley was on the “sex worker” panel at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force 2006 Creating Change conference.

From the pro-transexuality Gender Public Advocacy Coalition on Dec 17, 2006:

The Gender Public Advocacy Coalition (GenderPAC) today announced a grant of $125,000 from the Ford Foundation to develop new partnerships with community youth groups combating the crisis of masculinity among young men of color.

…The new effort, named “Community Partners,” is an expansion of GenderPAC’s GenderYOUTH Network, which empowers youth leaders to ensure classrooms and communities are safe for everyone – whether or not they fit stereotypes for masculinity or femininity. The Network currently supports student leaders on 55 campuses in 27 states.

Said Tyrone Hanley (pictured right), GenderYOUTH Coordinator, “These funds will enable us to better reach off-campus youth in local communities. They will also enable us to better address intersections of race and gender and the strong pressures many youth of color face when it comes to codes of masculinity and femininity.”

As an initial step in this new work, the GenderYOUTH spring campaign HIP-HOP: Beyond Beats & Rhymes, will focus on issues of misogyny, homophobia, and violent codes of masculinity in hip-hop culture and the larger American society. It is designed to help GenderYOUTH chapters hold mainstream culture accountable for perpetuating gender stereotypes, particularly among youth of color.

The campaign is part of a national effort also named HIP-HOP: Beyond Beats & Rhymes, after the groundbreaking documentary of the same name by filmmaker Byron Hurt. The documentary examines representations of manhood, sexism, and homophobia in hip-hop culture and will premiere February 20, 2007 on PBS. (For more information: www.itvs.org/outreach/hiphop).

A new GenderPAC human rights report documents an under-reported epidemic of murderous violence that has claimed the lives of more than 50 youth and young adults since 1995 because of their gender identity or expression – 92% of the victims were Black or Latina, and most were killed by young men their own age.

“These deaths are about young using murderous aggression to enforce standards of masculinity on other youth, and this grant will enable us to focus on underlying attitudes that foster such violence,” said Riki Wilchins, Executive Director of GenderPAC. “We thank the Ford Foundation for this amazing opportunity.”

Continue reading at GenderPAC…