How much is this lengthy debate costing Alaska taxpayers?

Excerpted from Same-Sex Benefits Dispute, by Andrea Gusty, published Nov 1, 2006, by KTVA:

Same-sex benefits for state and municipal employees: it’s been a seven-year debate in Alaska. The governor’s even called a third special session about it. The debate over same-sex benefits has been raging for the last seven years.

This summer the Alaska Supreme Court ordered the State of Alaska and the Municipality of Anchorage to provide health and retirement benefits for same-sex partners of state employees and retirees by the first of the year. What is being debated now is what the eligibility requirements for those benefits will be…

Earlier this week, the Anchorage Superior Court ordered the state commissioner to rewrite state regulations to include same sex couples–a move the Alaska attorney general [David Marquez, pictured left] says is, “inappropriate.”

Continue reading at KTVA…

Excerpted from Court Halts N.C. School District Policy Used to Prohibit Student from Distributing “Day of Truth” Cards, published Nov 2, 2006, by Alliance Defense Fund:

A federal judge today issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Sampson County Board of Education and Midway High School officials from enforcing two policies used to prohibit a student from distributing “Day of Truth” message cards to other students. Officials prohibited the student, represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, from distributing the cards outside of class time during the event April 27 and suspended him from school.

“Christian students are entitled to the same First Amendment rights as other students. No student should be suspended for exercising those rights,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. “The court’s ruling today prohibits the school district, while the case moves forward, from censoring a student flyer simply because it has religious content.”

“It’s clearly unconstitutional when students participating in the Day of Silence, which supports the homosexual agenda, observe their event by distributing flyers and so forth, but a student with an opposite perspective is prevented from communicating it during non-instructional time,” Cortman added.

Continue reading at Alliance Defense Fund…

Excerpted from Gay Marriage Ban Vote Looms In Mass., published Oct 31, 2006, by the pro-homosexuality 365Gay:

Two days after voters go to the polls members of the Massachusetts legislature will meet in a joint session to consider a measure that would end same-sex marriage in the only state where they are legal…

Continue reading at 365Gay…

Excerpted from The Auditor, published Oct 29, 2006, by The Star Ledger:

A Republican lawmaker’s call to impeach all seven members of the state Supreme Court because of its decision on gay marriage apparently didn’t go over too well with the justices.

The Auditor was told a judiciary staffer paid a call to Republican staff offices a day after the decision to voice irritation at Assemblyman Richard Merkt (R-Morris), who had issued the statement. During the visit the staffer “joked” that state law prohibits threatening judges, and since Merkt didn’t make the comments on the Assembly floor, he wasn’t immune from prosecution…

“The court doesn’t like the fact that I am calling them out,” [Merkt] said. “I’m delighted I got their attention.”

Continue reading at NJ.com…

Be sure to read The Confession (Part I) posted below…

“Many if not most of the major gay and lesbian organizations who have signed on to the fight for same-sex marriage would instantly sign off at any suggestion that they were actually encouraging gay men and lesbians to marry.” – Gabriel Rotello, in his 1997 book on the AIDS crisis, Sexual Ecology

Excerpted from The Confession, Part II, by Stanley Kurtz, published Nov 1, 2006, by National Review:

…Around the time the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage statement was released, a controversy broke out over news that the Boston Globe had told its gay employees to marry their partners or face losing their domestic-partnership benefits…

According to [Globe journalist Zak] Szymanski, “Many national LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] groups, despite their large investment in securing gay marriage, agree that there is a problem with a society that values marriage over all other family forms.”

For example, Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and a major spokesman in the battle for same-sex marriage, said, “We’re deeply disappointed by the Globe’s decision, and >we do not feel that benefits should flow only from marriage, because a married couple does not reflect the reality of the American family, gay or straight.”

Michelle Granda, of GLAD, which Szymanski calls “the group that is widely credited with winning same-sex marriage in Massachusetts,” said, “We have always believed families are configured in many ways and that marriage is not the answer for all families.”

…Here we have a clear indication of the family radicalism that hides beneath the only apparent conservatism of same-sex marriage advocacy groups…

A Striking Development
In late 2005, I published a piece entitled “Here Come the Brides,” about the role of bisexuality in the drive for legalized multiple-partner marriage. It’s notable that the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto justified its radical platform, in part, by lamenting the short shrift historically given to bisexuals by the broader LGBT movement. Among the signers of the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto were a number of bisexual activists. In “Here Come the Brides,” I also noted the role of Unitarian polyamory activists, and the potential role of arguments made by Yale law professor Kenji Yoshino in a pro-polyamory movement. Sure enough, the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto was signed by a number of Unitarian ministers and by professor Yoshino…

A Political Future
…Jonathan Rauch offered some remarkably frank concessions: “I had originally hoped that the [same-sex marriage] debate would not be followed by a polygamy debate, but clearly it has been. Some [same-sex marriage] advocates maintained that there was no significant constituency for polygamy, but that’s proving to be wrong as well.”

…This all means that in a post-gay-marriage world, the political organization of the gay community will shift. For now, “conservative” proponents of same-sex marriage are out in front, supported by a vast array of considerably less conservative activists and lobby groups. Meanwhile, the radicals are marginalized and/or intentionally keeping a low profile. In a post-gay-marriage world, this situation will flip. The radicals will step out in front, supported by largely the same coalition of activists and lobby groups who currently support same-sex marriage. At that point, the conservatives, no longer needed to run interference for the larger movement, will be quietly put out to pasture. By then we shall be well beyond same-sex marriage. Listen carefully to the words of same-sex marriage supporters, and they confess as much themselves.

Continue reading at National Review…

Excerpted from The Confession, by Stanley Kurtz, published Oct 31, 2006, by National Review:

Suppose a large group of same-sex-marriage activists came together and made the following confession to a group of same-sex-marriage skeptics:

“Look, we’re going to level with you in a way that we haven’t up to now. We all support same-sex marriage, but for many — even most — of us, gay marriage isn’t an end in itself. It’s a way-station on the path to a post-marriage society. We want a wide range of diverse families — even ‘polyamorous’ groupings of three or more partners — to have the same recognition, rights, and benefits as heterosexual married couples. In short, your worst fears are justified. The radical redefinition of marriage you’ve been worried about for so long is exactly what we want…

“And consider the complex families created when three or even four gay men and lesbians combine through, say, artificial insemination, to bear and raise children. We want recognition for these sorts of unconventional families too, even — or especially — if such recognition leads to legalized polyamory. Pretending that certain aspects of the gay community don’t exist only weakens our diverse families. The way we live is the way we live. Up to now, we’ve tried to hide it. But at last we’re ready to own up to reality, and to push for legal recognition for all types of families, even if that expands the definition of marriage until the very idea of marriage itself is stripped of meaning.”

For all practical purposes, this confession has already been offered. A good part of the substance of the above message was conveyed this past July, when hundreds of self-described lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and allied activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers released a manifesto entitled, “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage.” Among other things, that statement called for recognition of “committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner.”

Continue reading at National Review…

Excerpted from Public Nudity: Canadian Liberal Politicians and at Least One Supreme Court Justice, by John-Henry Westen, published Nov 1, 2006, by LifeSite News:

…This week, ironically anti-pornography week, Canadians were treated to the news that a high-ranking Liberal politician and at least one Supreme Court Justice have frolicked in public in the nude.

Liberal MP Scott Brison, a former Liberal Leadership candidate, has posed nude for a fundraising calendar. The openly homosexual MP who crossed the floor to the Liberals from the Conservatives, added to the move a crass joke. “I’m just trying to be a good member. I understand I’m not the only politician in the calendar, but they’re up for some stiff competition,” he told the press.

Defending his move, Brison cited Liberal Leadership front-runner Bob Rae, who was recently filmed skinny dipping for a gag with homosexual comedian Rick Mercer. Rae, the former Premier of Ontario and quite possibly a future Prime Minister of Canada, has his skinny dipping video littering the internet.

Yesterday, the Globe and Mail revealed that one of the nine Supreme Court Justices has apparently gone on a nude cruise…

It was after all seven of those nine justices who forced Canada to legalize swingers clubs. As a result of that decision they also caused severe damage to the legal concept of community standards on moral issues (Canadian Supreme Court’s “Swingers” Ruling Sets Dangerous Precedent, Says Organization).

Continue reading at LifeSite News…

Thanks to passage of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, the homosexual partner of former Congressman Gerry Studds, D-Massachusetts, will not be receiving federal death benefits or congressional pension. The pension alone is estimated at over $114,000 annually. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth discusses DOMA, Studds, and the drastically different treatment by homosexual activists of the Studds legacy versus their treatment of former Congressman Mark Foley, R-Florida.

Click HERE to listen.