From The Politically Incorrect Truth, by Tony Perkins, published Oct 5, 2006, by the Family Research Council:

In the last few days I’ve worked nearly two dozen media interviews on the scandal surrounding Republican Cong. Mark Foley (R-FL) into an already tight schedule that has had me crisscrossing the country. [View appearance on MSNBC’s “Hardball”] The response has been interesting. I’ve been attacked by the Left and some partisans on the Right. One issue that has sent the Left into a tizzy is the point I made in Monday’s Update about the link between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse. The more recent revelation that Foley himself was molested as a teenager, and his lawyer’s acknowledgment that he is indeed a homosexual, simply reinforce a pattern well-attested in the scholarly literature.

For example, the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy found that boys molested by men are almost four times more likely to become homosexual or bisexual than boys who weren’t molested. Homosexual activists don’t want you to know that, because it undermines the myth that people are “born gay.”

Although homosexuals and bisexuals are less than 3% of the male population, male-on-male abuse accounts for about a third of all child molestation.

The Archives of Sexual Behavior reported that “eighty-six percent of offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.” Homosexual activists don’t want you to know that either, because it undermines the myth that homosexuality is an entirely harmless “identity,” rather than a psychological and behavioral pathology. Not all homosexuals are child molesters, and not all child molesters are homosexual–but the link is simply too strong to ignore – even if it is politically incorrect.

We should step back and look at what we’ve become as a nation as tolerance and diversity have been made the guidepost for public life. Our children are not even safe in the midst of some of our nation’s leaders. Do we like what we see?

This is the lifestyle that is being promoted as “normal.” Is this what you call normal?

Lest you laugh this off as ridiculous, this is not a phenomenon unique to far away lands. Twenty-plus years ago, a department store in Southern Indiana resorted to removing the doors from the stalls in the men’s bathroom because of this behavior. And a homosexual “cruising” website lists similar locations across the world where men can meet for anonymous public sex.

Parents, please think twice about letting your young boys go to the men’s room alone.

Excerpted from Gay Sex Forces Closure of Store Toilets, by Jamie Padaram, published Oct 30, 2006, by The Sydney Morning Herald:

The closure of customer toilets in a Myer store due to rampant homosexual activity has exposed a massive list of venues being used by members of a gay website as hook-up points.

Among the places listed as meeting spots for men “cruising for sex”, on squirt.org, is the Royal Australian Air Force’s Richmond base and Sydney Opera House’s toilets.

Management at Myer’s Sydney city store in Pitt Street were forced to close its level one toilet to the public because homosexuals were using the facility as a meeting point, often having sex in full view of other horrified users.

…The website claims to list more than 15,000 locations around Australia “where gay and bisexual guys meet for sex”… A search of the site yielded hundreds of well-known Sydney buildings, parks and beaches.

Allyson Smith, a San Diego Catholic pro-life and pro-family advocate, and writer for Americans For Truth, wrote the following open letter to Father Steve Meriwether of Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco:

Sent Oct 30, 2006:

Father Meriwether,

Words fail to express my outrage at finding out that you are allowing the blasphemous sodomite drag queens, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, to use Most Holy Redeemer (located at 100 Diamond Street, Castro District, San Francisco) for their perverted, pornographic bingo games. You are not only the pastor of MHR, you are the CHANCELLOR of the San Francisco Archdiocese!

Sister Bea Attitude, Sister Merry Peter, Sister Sister Edith Myflesh, Sister Chastity Boner

How could you – how dare you – allow these perverts to desecrate Most Holy Redeemer by openly parading their abominable homosexual vice in the very same building where the true Most Holy Redeemer, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, is present in His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity?

Are you out of your mind – or do you find nothing wrong with this? Do you approve of sodomy, one of the sins that cries out to Heaven for vengeance, and of allowing open sodomites to desecrate our Lord’s Real Presence and His temple? It certainly appears so, as I just called your church and a staffer there, Joey, confirmed that you are aware of these activities and that they are taking place with your approval.

The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence make endless mockery of our Lord’s sacrifice at Calvary and of good, faithful nuns who spend their lives in prayerful, selfless service to the Church. They openly display their perversion in public streets during “gay pride” parades — and now, apparently, in your own parish. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!

According to an article last month in the San Francisco Bay Times, the SPI bingo games include sexual “punishments” for participants whose cell phones ring or who call a false bingo.

From the “we-couldn’t-make-this-up-if-we-tried” department. Only the “gay” academic movement could come up with something this wacky. But hey, why not? It’s just another “sexual orientation.”-– Peter LaBarbera

The following is excerpted from Students Role-play Sadomasochism in Toronto University’s Sexual Diversity Program, by Gudrun Schultz, published Oct 26, 2006, by LifeSite News:

University of Toronto students in the Sexual Diversity Studies Program explore sadomasochism, bondage and domination as part of an “academic” approach to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues, Reuters reported October 20.

Described as “edgy,” the Sexual Diversity Studies program is one of the largest of its kind in North America. Students and teachers defend the program as a serious approach to sexual issues.

“It’s not sexy sex sex, where we’re talking about whips and chains, but we will talk about whips and chains,” graduating student Robbie Morgan told Reuters. “We’ll talk about whips and chains in a political, social, cultural, religious context of sexuality and how that sexuality affects those institutions.”

Courtesy of our good friend, Linda Harvey of Mission America

Here’s what the Washington State “Safe Schools Coalition” has in mind for classrooms during November: presenting homosexuality as something revered among Native American Indians. (Happy Thanksgiving…) Please let us know if you encounter this sort of material in your child’s school.

PS – If you find this material disturbing (and you should), you can see the complete agenda at their site, including:

• Lesson Plans for K-12
• Books, videos, etc.
• Resources for teachers (click on subjects listed on the right: Coaches & PE, Drama, Health, History & Civics, Journalism/Media, Music, or Rural)

Dear Safe Schools Coalition members and friends,

Teachers who are planning your lessons for November may find it helpful to integrate some of the following, to infuse LGBTQ/2-spirit* cultural awareness into the every day life of your classroom. Especially those teaching history, civics, social studies, home and family life, or language arts.

1. Important dates to acknowledge in LGBTQ history for November and days of national recognition
2. Indigenous viewpoints on Thanksgiving
3. Two-spirit/GLBTQ* indigenous people to honor in the name of National American Indian Heritage Month

* LGBTQ = Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning and Queer.
** Two-spirit = a term of honor to describe a Native American or other Indigenous LGBTQ person, implying their special role as a spiritual bridge among genders. Usually the term is not chosen by an individual to describe him or herself (which would seem self-aggrandizing to many in Indian Country). More often it is a designation of respect conferred upon an individual by an elder.

By J. Matt Barber, General Counsel for Americans for Truth
Published Oct 28, 2006, by WorldNet Daily

You can put a pig in a mini-skirt, high heels and lipstick and call him Angelina Jolie, but he’s still a pig just the same. That’s just what pro-homosexual activists are trying to do this election season in Colorado. No, they haven’t partnered with PETA to raise awareness about the systematic discrimination of “transgendered” farm animals; but what they have done is enter into a clever and disingenuous game of political semantics relative to the so-called “gay-marriage” debate.

On Nov. 7, Coloradans will vote on Referendum I.

What is Referendum I? Well, opponents say that it’s a clear attempt by homosexual activists to circumvent Colorado’s marriage protection laws and legalize “gay marriage” through sleight of hand, while calling it something else. They assert that it’s a not so thinly veiled attempt to pass off counterfeit marriage beneath that innocuous pseudonym we’ve all come to know – “Domestic Partnerships.” (The bill associated with the referendum is the “Colorado Domestic Partnership Benefits and Responsibilities Act.”)

Proponents claim that the referendum doesn’t codify “gay marriage,” but rather, simply grants certain legal protections to homosexual couples that they cannot otherwise obtain.

So, who’s lying?

One can derive the answer by looking at the unequivocal language of the referendum itself: The Colorado Legislative Council’s “Blue Book” analysis of the ballot initiative states that Referendum I

“creates a new legal relationship, called a domestic partnership, providing same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the legal protections and responsibilities granted to married couples by Colorado law.”

The text of the Referendum indicates the bill’s intent

“to extend to same-sex couples in a Domestic Partnership the benefits, protections and responsibilities that are granted by Colorado law to spouses.”

So the verdict’s in, and the jury wasn’t out long – guilty as charged. “Domestic Partnerships” as defined under Referendum I, are very simply “gay marriages” by another name.

So, why all the fuss?

We’ve all heard the old adage “give ’em an inch and they’ll take a mile.” Well, in this case, If Coloradans pass Referendum I, it will be the first time that “domestic partnerships” will have been approved by the voters of a state, and it will require thousands of changes to existing Colorado state law, at a high cost to the taxpayer.

Where was Judy Baar Topinka on Wednesday evening?

High Risk Gallery

Log Cabin Republicans

and

Coup De Gras Catering

***

Cordially invite you to meet and talk with Illinois’ next Governor…

Judy Baar Topinka

***

Tonight!

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

8:00pm to 8:45pm

***

High Risk Gallery

1113 West Belmont-Chicago, Illinois

The event is free and open to the public.

For further event information, please contact High Risk Gallery at (773) 296-6974 or www.highriskgallery.com.

***

There will be a VIP Reception Fundraiser before the Meet and Greet event including

Cocktails & Hors D’oeuvres

6:00pm-7:30pm

***

Benefactor: $100 per person

Friend: $50 per person

Please make checks payable to Citizens for Topinka.

Paid for by Citizens for Judy Baar Topinka. A copy of our report filed with the State Board of Elections is, or will be, available for purchase from the State Board of Elections, Springfield, IL. Contributions, or gifts, to the organization are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

Click on these links to see photos of Judy Baar Topinka at other 2006 Log Cabin events:

• At the Log Cabin Republicans Judy Baar Topinka Chicagoland Golf Outing
• At the Log Cabin Republicans Market Days Meet & Greet with Judy Baar Topinka

Excerpted from On Equal Terms, by Dr. Albert Mohler, published Oct 26, 2006:

…One of the most striking aspects of the New Jersey decision is the fact that not a single justice held marriage to be an essentially heterosexual institution that deserves a privileged status as recognized in law. This points to a basic social revolution that is sweeping through the nation’s elites — especially on college and university campuses, and law schools, and in the media.

We are living in an age of ambitious and open revolt against civilization’s most central institution. The headlines of the newspapers will indicate that the New Jersey decision is significant. Only a relative few seem to understand that this amounts to a redefinition of human society. The social regulation of sexuality and the legal recognition of marriage are fundamental to our civilization and way of life. We are witnessing the destruction of an institution fundamental to human happiness and well-being — and all in the name of a radical conception of human rights.

Note this: These plaintiffs did not charge that their rights to marry were violated by the U.S. Constitution — but that charge is surely coming. In short order a case like this will arrive at the US Supreme Court. This is why the Marriage Protection Amendment is so urgently needed and why the battle must be fought in every state.

We are reminded once again that we face a stark set of alternatives: Either we will define marriage for the judges, or the judges will define marriage for us.

Continue reading…