UPDATE — Also see Newsday story published Feb 25, 2007.

Excerpted from Millions At Stake In Gay Adult Adoption Case, published Jan 15, 2007, by the pro-homosexuality 365Gay:

…In 1991 Olive F. Watson used [a Maine adult adoption] law to adopt her partner of 14 years, Patricia A. Spado. Even though the couple lived in Connecticut Watson owned a summer home in Maine.

Watson was the daughter of former IBM executive Thomas J. Watson Jr., who was the CEO of the company from 1956 to 1971…

When Watson adopted Spado there were no same-sex partnership agreements in the country and Watson believed it would provide Spado with security if anything happened to her.

But a year later the couple broke up.

When Thomas Watson’s widow died in 2004 his fortune went into a trust and her 18 grandchildren became eligible to receive income from two trusts until they turned 35, at which time they would receive the principal outright.

Several months later a lawyer representing Spado notified the trust that there was a 19th grandchild, Spado, and that she also was entitled to a share of the trust.

Continue reading at 365Gay…

Excerpted from Christian Magistrate Forced To Resign For Refusing to Place Children In Gay Homes, by Meg Jalsevac, published Nov 28, 2006, by LifeSite News:

Andrew McClintock, an 18 year veteran in magistrate court on the South Yorkshire Bench, is suing the British Department for Constitutional Affairs for discrimination against his religious beliefs.  McClintock says that he had no option but to resign when his superiors told him that he would not be permitted to refuse to place children in adoptive homes with homosexual parents.  McClintock says to do so would directly contradict his Christian beliefs that homosexuality is immoral.

Continue reading at LifeSite News…

The National Coalition of American Nuns has issued an open letter encouraging “all Catholic citizens to vote their own consciences in the November elections.” Two of their seven points are supportive of homosexuality and same-sex “marriage” even though the Catholic church stands squarely against such.

4. We believe that citizens in committed relationships – whether marriages or civil unions – should retain all rights consonant with their state including, but not limited to, adoption of children, ownership of property, inheritance, health, and end-of-life decisions.

7. We pledge ourselves to initiate, invite, and support deepening actions on behalf of social justice, particularly as these impact women, racial/ethnic minorities, and gay or lesbian persons.

Catholic Citizens has posted a “heresy update” regarding this letter.

LifeSite News has published a related story entitled American Nuns’ Group Voter’s Guide Favours Abortion, Homosexuality.

David French, attorney for MSU social work graduate Emily Brooker, is blogging at National Review Online about the Brooker v Missouri State University case:

There is a good article in this morning’s USA Today regarding the Alliance Defense Fund’s lawsuit against Missouri State. I have been giving several interviews about the case, and I am consistently asked two things: (1) are you saying that students can refuse assignments?; and (2) is this case “just” an academic-freedom dispute, or is it more than that?

First — to clear up any confusion — this is not a case about a student who is merely asked to play “devil’s advocate” in a classroom exercise. Of course teachers can ask you to debate and discuss various ideas from all sides of a dispute. During law school, several of my professors presented hypothetical cases and then asked us to write the majority opinion and the dissent in the case. The plaintiff, Emily Brooker, was not merely asked to think about all sides of an issue or argue different sides in class, she was asked to make an ideological argument in a contentious cultural issue to the state government. Moreover, she was supposed to argue for a position that violated her religious beliefs.

And this gets us to the real heart of the case: the magnitude of the constitutional violation. This is not “just” an academic-freedom dispute but instead represents an attempt by an academic department to pass into the “final frontier”…of university indoctrination. For more than 20 years now, conservative, libertarian, and even many liberal critics of the academy have decried the tendency of universities to silence dissenters. Many of these same critics have also decried one-sided course instruction and a faculty culture that leans overwhelmingly left. By silencing dissent and ensuring that only one side is heard, the university certainly “indoctrinates” students (as that term is commonly understood). But this case is something more. Here, the university goes beyond censorship, beyond one-sided instruction, and invades the student’s most basic right to freedom of conscience. It is not enough to silence students. Instead, the department must force individuals to voice their agreement with the governing ideology.

It is no exaggeration to call this system “Orwellian.” At the end of 1984 (spoiler alert for those who haven’t read the book), Winston Smith not only says that he loves Big Brother; he means it. Missouri State was going to force Emily Brooker to publicly support the campus’s reigning leftist ideology, and the punishment that resulted from the Star Chamber hearing was entirely designed to make sure that she meant it. After all, how could Emily follow the university’s command to “lessen the gap” between her own beliefs and the so-called “ethics” of the social-work profession but by changing her mind and heart?

Excerpted from School ‘Ethics’ Group Punishes Student for Opposing Homosexual Adoption, by Jim Brown, published Nov 1, 2006, by Agape Press:

…According to news reports, Dr. Frank Kaufman — an assistant professor in MSU’s School of Social Work on the Springfield campus and a member of the Faculty Senate at MSU — assigned his students a project promoting homosexual foster homes and adoption. The students were required to write and individually sign a letter to the Missouri legislature in support of homosexual adoption. Emily Brooker says she refused to sign the letter because of her religious convictions, and alleges she was punished for taking that stand.

Brooker says the school subjected her to a grievance hearing where school officials told her she had violated three of the “Standards of Essential Functioning in Social Work Education”: diversity, interpersonal skills, and professional behavior. The social work student is now suing the university for a violation of her First Amendment rights. Her attorney, David French with the Alliance Defense Fund, claims his client was interrogated for two-and-a-half hours by faculty members about the matter.

“She was brought into a hearing where she was denied any access to a recording of the hearing, any advocate in the hearing, and subjected to a grilling,” says French. The attorney says Brooker was asked questions like “Do you think I’m a sinner?” and “Do you think gays and lesbians are sinners?”

French describes the entire situation as “really an amazing case.” He explains that at the December 2005 hearing she was “punished, forced to undergo close monitoring for the rest of her career at the university, and forced to write things, again, that she disagreed with in order to graduate.”

The ADF attorney says many public universities are requiring student to adopt leftist positions in order to obtain a social work degree. “The social work programs are saying that, in order to be a social worker, in order to get a degree, you’re going to have to agree with the university’s stance on various issues,” he shares, “including issues regarding homosexual ‘marriage,’ including issues regarding the entire diversity-tolerance agenda.”

Continue reading at Agape Press…

Question for parents:
Is this book in your child’s classroom?

From our friends at Minnesota Family Institute:

Against one mothers wishes, 7 and 8 year old children were forced to sit through the reading of “Asha’s Mums,” a book depicting a child with two mothers, and listen to their teacher tell them that he and his same-sex partner planned to adopt a child.

Click HERE to view KSTP news clip.

FeLicia McCorvey Preyer, mother of second graders twins, said she met the teacher and school officials before the start of the school year. “I mentioned,” she said, “that I did not want my child hearing this information” about gay issues. Preyer said that instead of supporting her parental rights and authority, she was treated with disrespect and even arrogance. “They treat me as if my beliefs are the problem,” she said.

Gena Bounds, a parent of one of the second-graders said, “Now Darriell (her daughter) thinks the school is telling her she needs to believe that two daddies or two mommies is the same thing as a mom and a dad.”

When the parents met with the principal, they were told their children could not be reassigned to another class. Principal Laura Bloomberg [phone (612) 752-7100 or e-mail laura_bloomberg@wmep.k12.mn.us] said the mission of the school is to build “a partnership of diversity, community and technology.” She said parents were free to object to the school board or withdraw their children from the school.

Minnesota State Statue states that parents have the right to review curriculum and request their children be excused from parts of it.

“This kind of curriculum is becoming the norm, not the exception,” said Chuck Darrell, director of communications for Minnesota Family Council. “Parents need to speak out or they too will find themselves at the whim of arrogant school officials who do not respect their simple requests, such as removing a 7-year-old child from being subjected to homosexual propaganda,” he said.

If you think we have it bad with aggressive homosexual activism here in the USA (and we do, especially if you live near a big city), then thank God you don’t live in The Netherlands. You won’t believe this Dutch video (with English subtitles) that you can access by clicking the link below. In this video–which appears to be a Dutch equivalent of a staged “Barney” concert (for very young children)–a pre-adolescent boy, Terence, sings earnestly: “I have two fathers, two real fathers.” Hundreds of children in the studio audience sing along with their parents.

Of course, “gay” advocates think this video is wonderful and wish Americans were as “progressive” as the Dutch–illustrating the huge philosophical gap between pro-family advocates and their pro-homosexual foes. Remember, this is the “family” brand of homosexual activism … the “conservative,” domesticated side of their movement. And it necessarily requires indoctrinating the minds of impressionable children that having “two fathers” or “two mothers” is a good thing. In one of the song’s lines, Terence says of his “two fathers”: “Who, if they have to, both can be my mother.” Talk about redefining the family!

The “diversity” movement couldn’t be more wrong: “two daddies” can never replace a mom in a child’s life, and it is utterly selfish of homosexual adults to intentionally put children in this position–and to subject other children to propaganda like this.

Today, the Netherlands. Tomorrow, the USA? God help us.– Peter LaBarbera

To view the video, CLICK HERE

Excerpted from How Britain is Turning Christianity into a Crime, by Melanie Phillips, published Sept 7, 2006, in The Daily Mail (UK):

…The problem for Christianity is that it holds that homosexuality is wrong. This, however, it is no longer allowed to say because it treats a minority practice as sinful. So it can no longer uphold a central tenet of its own faith without being accused of prejudice.

…Author Lynette Burrows received a warning from the Metropolitan Police merely for suggesting that gay people did not make ideal adoptive parents. The former leader of the Muslim Council of Britain, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, also had his collar felt by police after he said that homosexuality was harmful.Notably, in his case the matter was swiftly dropped. If there’s one thing that terrifies our PC police even more than being called homophobic, it’s being called Islamophobic — even though Islamic fundamentalism poses a real threat to the human rights of gay people.

If this wasn’t all so frightening, it would be hilarious.

Christians, by contrast, get very different treatment. An elderly evangelical preacher, Harry Hammond, was convicted of a public order offence after he held up a poster calling for an end to homosexuality, lesbianism and immorality. Although he had been the victim of a physical attack when a crowd poured soil and water over him, he alone was prosecuted.

And Lancashire pensioners Joe and Helen Roberts were interrogated by police for 80 minutes about their ‘ homophobic’ views after they had merely asked their local council to display Christian literature alongside gay rights leaflets in civic buildings.

Christianity is fast becoming the creed that dare not speak its name…

The ‘diversity’ agenda, in other words, is a fig-leaf for an attack on Christianity…

This attack on Christianity…is not merely a threat to freedom of speech and religious expression. It is a fundamental onslaught on the national identity and bedrock values of this country — and as such will destroy those freedoms which Christianity itself first created.

Continue reading in The Daily Mail…