Romney: Sex Offenders = Good, Gay and Lesbian Youth = Bad

The Governor of Massachusetts signed the budget that the legislature sent him. However, he only signed it after he stripped 110 million from it which he deemed ineffective or wasteful.

But he cut funding that he said wasn't necessary or went around typical funding avenues. Among his vetoes was $43 million in state Medicaid funding for nursing homes, $4 million for a new Office of Travel and Tourism, and a $100,000 funding increase for the Gov.'s Commission on gay and Lesbian Youth.

I guess he wants to be known as a budget cutter. With the cutting, it appears that he also cut some revenue coming into the state:

Romney also got rid of a $75 fee that sexual offenders would have been required to pay when they registered with the state. Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey said the provision could discourage offenders from registering, and said the state should instead beef up penalties for offenders who don't register.

So the Governor doesn't want to fund suicide prevention and violence programs that protect gay and lesbian youth, nursing homes or tourism but he doesn't want to make sexual offenders pay a fee for signing up (which they are required to do by law) Nice precedent this guy is setting, he cares more about sex offenders than he does children and the elderly and apparently so does his Lt. Gov. Whatsherename.

I wonder how much he is going to spend on the new faith based initiatives commission that he just appointed his wife to?

Massresistance Keeps up the Lying

Massresistance, that homophobic "blog", is once again attacking GLSEN. They use a quote which they say was given by the founder of GLSEN, Kevin Jennings. Whether he said it or not is questionable since Ms. Massresistance doesn't provide a link or any reference for the quote (she always seems to have references for all the usual anti-gay anti-family stuff).

Regardless of whether the quote is true or not, there is no denying that GLSEN should have been involved in the educational process. While GLSEN has done much, there is still much more to do. Jennings states on the GLSEN website:

75 percent of America's students still do not have legal protections in place; More than 80 percent of our high schools still lack GSA's or similar student clubs; Nearly 70 percent of high school students admit that they personally use homophobic and derogatory epithets frequently or often.

Ms. Massresistance seems to believe that its all a sham and gay and lesbian youth do not have higher incidents of suicide. Remember that Article 8 wants the Governor to veto the spending for suicide and violence prevention for youth. Massresistance wants the Governor to veto all the funding for the Commission for Gay and Lesbian youth. This infuriates me because these ignorant people keep denying the truth.

• Gay and lesbian people exist, we're not going away, we've been here since the beginning.
• Gay and lesbian youth exist and are five times more likely to attempt suicide, three times more likely to miss school because of feeling unsafe and three times more likely to have been injured othreateneded with a weapon at school(Youth Risk Behavior Survey Results - 2003)
• Gay and lesbian couples can adopt and/or have children
• Gay and lesbian couples can get legally married in Massachusetts.

I did not come out until I was 27. I came out because a student at my high school was bashed in school for being gay. That boy then took his own life because of thharassmentnt he experienced. I vowed to never again hide in a closet.

GLBT teens need to know that they are normal and that there is nothing wrong with them. They can be teachers, doctors, engineers, parents, etc... They have nothing to be ashamed of. These hateful people: Massresistance, Article 8, Mass Family Institute, etc... want to turn back the clock and change these kids, we want to accept them as they are.

We don't choose to be gay, the only choice we have is whether to hide it or not.

Silence = Death.

It's the Homosexuals Fault!

This was on yahoo news tonight:

Iraq War Takes Toll on Army Marriages

How long do you think it will take until Massresistance blames this one on us? I'm sure someone from the Right will find some way to blame this on the same sex couples getting married in Massachusetts. Maybe all the soldiers are really gay and since they "didn't ask", they "didn't tell" and now because they can get married in Massachusetts they are leaving their wives? Sound plausible? I bet you'll read it on Mass "Family" Institute's website next week (Article 8's tomorrow?).

Between 2001 and 2004, divorces among active-duty Army officers and enlisted personnel nearly doubled, from 5,658 to 10,477, even though total troop strength remained stable. In 2002, the divorce rate among married officers was 1.9 percent -- 1,060 divorces out of 54,542 marriages; by 2004, the rate had tripled to 6 percent, with 3,325 divorces out of 55,550 marriages.

For the record, same sex couples started getting married in 2004, not 2001. The Mass SJC didn't even rule on it until Nov. 2003 so we can't get blamed for this one can we?

The only person to blame to President George W. Bush. Apparently he doesn't care for married heterosexual couples nor homosexual soldiers. After all, gays are not allowed in the military so we have no one to blame other than Georgie since he started the war.

Can someone explain this to me?

The Religious Right, Article 8, Fred Phelp's Westboro Baptist Church, the Catholic Church, Massresistance, etc... for the past couple of years have been shouting from the rooftops that "We need to save traditional marriage" or "Marriage has always been between a man and a woman!"
I can recall the signs at the constitutional conventions from the anti-gay folks and they weren't kind to say the least. But again, they reiterated, "Traditional Marriage" "Marriage has always been between Man and woman" "Adam and Eve..."

OK.....

So why did Massresistance start quoting from some "Emeritus Professor of English and Latin at Old Dominion Univeristy" who said:

"Gay marriage" was "a key element in the collapse of the Roman Empire,"

or

"Same-sex 'marriage' was the invention of the Emperor Nero in the first-century A.D. In a comparatively long reign among the first-century Caesars (A.D. 54-68),
he began as a talented and generous though youthful friend of the people, but degenerated in a mere 14 years to become the prototype of Lord Acton's axiom:
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So which is it, either there has never been same sex marriage ever or there was? I wish these people would get their facts straight (so to speak). Maybe it is just convenient to blame gay people for everything bad that happens in the world. (I never knew we had so much power!!)God knows they don't credit the homos for creating the most beautiful art in Rome (the world?) or the wonderful music on Broadway.

Showtime's Same Sex America Documentary

Did you happen to catch Showtime's documentary last night? It was good, although I wouldn't go as far as one reviewer who said it was the best documentary on same sex marriage.

My biggest problem with the movie was that many of the scenes were out of order. Having attended all of last year's events I knew when some of the rallies were out of place. However, I understand that the film was more about the 4 or so couples they were following and not on the actual chronological events. Here are a few comments I thought of while watching:

• The real difference between the two groups showed that we have families and are fighting for justice and the other side is just trying to take away our rights.
• Is Laurie Letourneau from Worcester (that woman who was "threatening" to move to Virginia) still living in the state? I had actually called her last year, she was organizing the church buses to come to Boston for the convention, to ask her why she was doing this and she hung up on me.
• The discussions between the children and their parents seemed a bit contrived. I'm guessing they must have had these conversations before the cameras started rolling. In that same vein, unless the children were actors, you can't coach kids into asking questions like that on cue so I actually loved hearing what the kids had to say.
• Arline Isaacson is one of the smartest women in Massachusetts politics.
• The speech by the daughter of the interracial couple was so touching that it brought tears to the eyes.
• The woman in the beginning of the film with the luggage, singing in the statehouse (in front of the stairs) reminded me of someone from the Poltergeist movies.
• Alan Keyes and Sandy Rios were at the Article 8 rally shown briefly in the movie. These two were talking about family values and activist judges at the rally. This is funny since Alan Keyes threw his daughter out of the house when she came out and Sandy Rios is divorced (so much for family values and "traditional marriage")

Your thoughts?

It's Lies and Misinformation All Around

Well, Article 8 is pissed because the Massachusetts Legislature just approved the new State Budget, unanimously and it includes spending for gay and lesbian youth. They want the Governor to veto two spending bills because one of the budget items which provides health education funding includes some amounts for gay and lesbian youth (in addition to money for school nurses and obesity programs.)

Article 8 is further incensed because the money is going to suicide Prevention and anti-violence programs aimed at youth at risk. My take on this, Article 8 believes suicide and violence is better for kids than learning that it is ok to be gay and normal. Why would they want to take funding away from suicide prevention? They are always acting like they care about the children, however, this mean spirited act surely wreaks of prejudice.

Lies

This past week it was Agagepress and Ma "Family" Institute lying, now this week starts off with Article 8. It was on another page that I found Article 8, again lying about what the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth does at the BAGLY Prom. (and this isn't the first time Article 8 has lied or stretched the truth) At the bottom of the page it says:

How weird was it? In true "transgender" form, the organizers covered the "men" and"women" labels on the rest room doors inside City Hall. Unisex bathrooms for the gay prom.

This is an outright LIE. I was at the Prom as a chaperone, I took the orientation before the Prom started. The bathroom signs were NOT covered and we were instructed to make sure that only boys and girls used their respected bathrooms.

Showtime Premieres Documentary

Tonight, Showtime is premiering a documentary called: Same Sex America at 8:00pm EST. The film was shown at the Tribeca Film Festival and has been noted for its human portrayal of both sides of the same sex marriage issue. A brief description of the film:

Filmmaker Henry Corra chronicles the battle over gay marriage in Massachusetts, the first U.S. state to sanction same-sex civil unions, by charting the journey of seven gay and lesbian couples navigating the treacherous political landscape in an effort to win what many consider a basic human right, while others see the struggle as an erosion of morality.

Mass "Family" Leader Lies?

Or does Agapepress misquote and misrepresent once again? In Friday's installment of Agape press' current attack on families, they quote Kris Mineau, the leader of the anti-gay anti-family Mass Family Institute:

Mineau says he is glad Governor Romney has pledged to support the citizens' effort. "He's definitely taking a stronger stand," the head of the MFI contends, "and I would suspect that it has something to do with him trying to get more 'conservative credentialed' in a national prominence

The article goes further:

According to Mineau, the key to the measure the citizens group is promoting is that it prohibits both homosexual marriage and same-sex civil unions. He notes, "The governor has always stood with us in being against civil unions and for marriage being between a man and a woman."

Not so fast Mr. Mineau. During the last constitutional convention in Massachusetts, Gov. Romney advocated all the Republican legislators to vote for the amendment which establishes civil unions. See this article published on March 30, 2004 entitled "In crucial shift, governor sways 15 in GOP to support measure" It states:

Through all the twists and shifts during the gay-marriage debate this year, there was one constant: 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed every measure that would grant gay couples civil unions in the constitution.

That all changed yesterday, however, when 15 of that 22-member bloc broke away at the urging of Governor Mitt Romney and voted in favor of a proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but create Vermont-style civil unions.

Additionally, anti-gay groups in Massachusetts and around the country were upset that Gov. Romney didn't stop the marriages from going into effect.

Poor Gov. Romney, he wants it both ways. First he was for it and now he's against it! Kinda sounds like a flip flopper to me.

Mass Republicans Seeing the Light

An article in yesterday's GLOBE highlighted the action of one (and soon not the only) Republican legislator in Massachusetts to finally see the truth about the anti-gay anti-family constitutional amendment on same sex marriage:

''I have been very clear from the start that I wanted to pay attention to both sides of the issue [same sex marriage], and that"s why I voted for it, so we could go forward and have that discussion," Hill said in an interview yesterday.
That discussion has taken place, he said, and now he believes that the state should not alter the Massachusetts Constitution.

Representative Bradford Hill made this announcement at a meeting in solidly Republican town of Manchester-by-the-Sea.

Hill went on to say:

''Same-sex couples should be afforded equal rights, and that's what I have always believed," Hill said

The truth always wins out in the end and bigots do not prevail.

Mass Marrier also covered this story earlier and has more thoughts on the subject here.

"Just As Good"?

In today's GLOBE there is a letter to the editor from a John Fountain in Needham. It seems Mr. Fountain is concerned with a "slippery slope" of talking about loving same sex parents. He says:

The great majority of us agree that gay-oriented folks have a right to tolerance, full acceptance, and respect from the other 96 percent of the population. But do they also have the right to expect full public endorsement of gay orientation as a ''just as good" alternative? And, above all, do we want our public school teachers to convey this ''just as good" perspective to the young and impressionable kids in their charge?

So what is he saying?

• He assumes that we are only 4% of the population.
• same sex parents are not "just as good" as heterosexual parents and teachers shouldn't give this impression.

I'd like to take his second point one step further. Why don't we come up with a chart ranking parents from "good" to "almost as good", "average good", "not as good" or "just plain bad". Of course we will have to take various factors into account:

• The age of the children & parents, i.e., a "Good" set of parents would be 28 years of age and have a 5 year old child so parents that are 33 years old with a 5 year old child would not be "just as good" (get the picture);
• The careers of the parents: families with a father working all day and a stay at home mom would be the ideal so 2 parents working would not be "just as good" but better than both parents staying at home. (I think the varying scales of "good" would take into account the type of job too)
• Of course the race and religion of the family should be included. We all know that some religions and races are not "just as good" as others.
• Same sex parents would not even be on the list since they are surely not "just as good" as even the "just plain bad" parents (as long as the "just plain bad" parents are opposite sex)
• Finally, I'm sure we could leave the rest to the voters to rate in our "just as good" chart since the letter writer wants the voters and elected officials to address this "slippery slope". These could include hair color, family lineage, income level, political party, etc....

Maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe he wasn't talking about just same sex parents.

Maybe he was talking about gay people in general.

I get it, he's saying that the 4% of the gay people in this world are not "just as good" as the heterosexual people. That's a relief. I really don't think we need to do a chart. If we still have information on how the Nazi's categorized all the people in Germany we could use that, why reinvent the wheel?

The Peacock Shines

The Advocate is listing a story about NBC's Today Show. It seems that the Today Show revised the policy in its wedding contest to include same sex couples. The contest has also changed so that the winning couple can get married in their hometown (Do you hear that Massachusetts!)

"Fairness, inclusion, and equal opportunity are core American values, and NBC's decision to open Today's wedding series to gay and lesbian couples is an important affirmation of those values," said GLAAD director of media programs and communications Glennda Testone. "By accepting eligible same-sex couples into one of its flagship programs, NBC--like the more than 500 newspapers across America that now accept gay and lesbian wedding announcements--is reflecting the reality of the world around us."

I can only imagine who is going to boycott NBC if the winning couple is a same sex couple in Massachusetts. But they better hurry, because the Massachusetts Catholic Bishops and Gov. Romney are only concerned with same sex marriages that take place AFTER 2008. They give their blessing to the 6000+ couples that have gotten married so far.

Article 8 Once AGAIN Speaks for Parker

In today's Lexington Minuteman, Article 8 leader, Brian Camenker tries to blame the outrage over this prejudicial father's [Parker] actions on a "relatively small but very vocal minority". Apparently, this "small minority" created a "tidal wave" of calls to TV stations, radio stations, letters, signs, etc... Which has made Camenker envious, since that is what he and his very small band of Article 8 followers (and lone Massresister) has been trying to do for years.

Here's a breakdown of what he claims in the paper:

But instead, a relatively small but very vocal (and angry) group of people has undertaken a campaign of hysteria, lies, fear, and intimidation to discredit and demonize David Parker, his family, and anyone associated with him, including other parents who came to his side, Pastor Jed Snyder of Countryside Bible Chapel, and my group, Article 8 Alliance. There's been a tidal wave of letters to the editor, signs, op-ed articles, calls to talk shows, TV stations, and even calls to the Parker home.

In reality:

• Article 8's Massresistance attacks their own: Jed Snyder
• Attacks on Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justice Margaret Marshall
• Attacks on same sex couples who have gotten married by Massresistance
• Illegally taping a workshop held for teenagers
• Picketing Tom Finneran
• Protest at Fanueil Hall, Northampton and Boston City Hall

Camenker:

Speaking of "hate group" tactics: A few Sundays ago the "tolerant" Lexington Cares people picketed outside a church in Wayland because it had the nerve to host an event to support David Parker. Isn't that exactly what the Kansas people did?

Reality:

• see protests above
• The Lexington Cares group stood by watching silently unlike Article 8 having a man dress up like Margaret Marshall and destroy the Massachusetts constitution
• Their attacks on religious groups

Camenker:

It gets ludicrous. In a letter to the Minuteman, Juli Davidson said our Web site contains "hateful rhetoric" which she quoted as: "... jackbooted thugs currently in control in Lexington." Nothing like that was ever on our Web site. But why let facts get in the way? (Actually, that's on the MassResistance blog. But come on. Hateful rhetoric? Lighten up a bit! After all, they love calling us Nazis.)

Reality:

• Lighten up? They are trying to take away rights from people and they say lighten up?
• Links are found between Parker, Article 8, Massresistance and the Parents' Right Coalition
• Article 8 has a link to Massresistance on its website.
• Additionally, the person who writes the blog is part of Article 8 (do a google search)

Camenker:

I had worked with these kinds of situations in Newton, so last January David called me for some advice. He needed some support, especially since so much of this emanates from national groups. Article 8 Alliance agreed to work with him.

Reality:

• Ok, who's lying here? David Parker says he wasn't involved with Article 8 yet Camenker says he was?

Camenker:

It's unfortunate for Lexington that the "Lexington Cares" bunch can't defend their position, so they resort to hysterical ad hominem attacks and other intimidation devices. It's a truly disgusting tactic. They are destroying the reputations of decent people who simply insist on sticking to their own beliefs. Good people must not let this happen.

Just read the posts on this blog. Do a yahoo or google search of Massresistance and Article 8 for yourself. See their websites. Read through the hateful things Article 8 and Massresistance has been doing to innocent law abiding people of this Commonwealth and judge for yourself. Brian Camenker's letter in the Lexington Minuteman is simply DISGUSTING.

Jeff Jacoby Gets It Wrong (Again)

Jeff Jacoby, the conservative op-ed writer for the Boston Globe, trashed public schools in an article in the Globe. Luckily, we still have people who know the truth and called this "writer" to task for practically all the statements he made about the David Parker and the Lexington Schools.

In a letter to the editor, Soheil Zendeh points out the many untruths which Jacoby (who's rantings are picked up by a number of anti-gay sites) stated in his OpEd. Soheil correctly points out what we have know all along:

David Parker, the Lexington father, did not find ''himself in a war with his local school board." He and his clique of fundamentalists staged an action, complete with videotaping of the events.

That David Parker, Article 8 and Massresistance, the unholy trinity, orchestrated the whole disgusting event which lead to the media circus that the Westboro Baptist Church eventually participated in.

Where are we heading? Well, in December 2003, a child In Louisiana was scolded by the assistant principal because he had two mommies and told another classmate about them:

"I was concerned when the assistant principal called and told me my son had said a word so bad that he didn't want to repeat it over the phone," said Sharon Huff, the second-grader's mother.
"But that was nothing compared to the shock I felt when my little boy came home and told me that his teacher had told him his family is a dirty word. No child should ever hear that, especially not from a teacher he trusted and respected."

This is what Jacoby, Parker, Article 8 and Massresistance wants to happen in Massachusetts.

C'est bon in Canada

Despite all the hateful rhetoric from the right, it's comforting to remember that there are many people who respect the judiciary and honor democratic principles of equality, justice, and decency.

In Canada, the NDP and Bloc Québécois parties are demanding that the Prime Minister extend the legislative session to pass the same-sex civil marriage legislation. What's the hold-up? The Conservatives are "filibustering" the legislation. (Gee, I guess the Conservatives in Canada are happy Bill Frist isn't their leader. Otherwise, what would they do?) The filibuster may yet succeed for now, but according to the Prime Minister, the Government's commitment to the bill is "unwavering."

For more information read the Globeandmail.com

Romney, Catholic Bishops & Mass "Family" Institute: Intellectually Dishonest

I read this post to this blog and felt it needed to be on the main page. The anonymous poster has some wonderful points:

It pains me to say this, but Article 8 is right. Article 8 objects to the proposed 2008 amendment on the grounds that, among other things, it grandfathers pre-amendment marriages; and that's a valid objection.

If Gov. Romney, the Catholic Bishops (note, not the people), and the Evangelical Christians oppose same-sex unions on moral grounds, then what is the moral/intellectual argument for allowing some marriages to stand? And if the answer is political expediency, i.e., it's a more palatable amendment to the voters nervous about voiding marriages, then are we to understand that these churches [and Gov. Romney] teach that we should always act in accord with the Bible, except when it's politically expedient to do otherwise?

This new admendment started by the Mass "Family" Institute is a sham for discrimination against gay and lesbian people. Here are a couple of articles in today's Globe that MA "Family" should be addressing instead of trying to tear families apart:

• Violence raging among teen girls
• Children's center hangs on
• Former police officer and prison guard accused of molesting girl

I thought the whole idea was to help people and families, not tear them apart?

ONE Child of a Gay Parent has a Bad Childhood

Massresistance, in its never ending obsession with homosexual sex, is stereotyping ALL gay parents because ONE child in Canada says that she lived a terrible childhood in the 60's and 70's (wasn't the 60's and 70's the sexual revolution for hetero as well has homosexual adults?).

We are all supposed to overlook the fact that she is now writing a book (can you say Christina Crawford?) and that her story is published by that ever unbiased Agape Press. It says her father died in 1991 but it doesn't say why NOW she is telling her story.

She is "testifying" against same sex marriage in Canada. She says:

My biggest concern is that children are not being discussed in this same-sex marriage debate. Yet, won't the next step for some gay activists be to ask for legal adoption of children if same-sex marriage is legalized?

Same sex couples in this country can already adopt children. Giving same sex couples marriage rights ensure that those children are protected by the same rights and priviledges that opposite sex couples enjoy.

It is almost embarrassing reading this woman's story since she sounds so crazy and frantic. What's funny is that the whole story is footnoted. If you check out the footnotes, it reads like an attendance list at the GOP Convention. The references are from the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, Exodus International, Worldnet Daily, NARTH, and other wacko Christian groups. There is not one unbiased source (it includes an article written by Maggie Gallagher, the woman who the Bush Administration paid to write about marriage and then she failed to mention that teeny weenie fact). Click here to read more about these groups and what they have to say about gay people in general, it's very sweet.

Strangely enough, there are several references to Catholic Church teachings, and we all know how well the church is all about protecting the children. The Catholic Church has done such a great job protecting children in Boston that Cardinal Law got a promotion from the Late Pope John Paul II. Dioceses all over the country have spent millions of dollars on "protecting" the children.

Hypocrites!

The Boston Globe has an article about The Mass "Family" Institute's latest foray into discrimination against families. Today I will only dwell on one portion of the Mass "Family" Institute's quest for bigotry in the Mass Constitution. They say:

Civil Unions are discriminatory in providing special privileges based on the sexual preference of a small, vocal minority. There are many people with valid needs in the Commonwealth who have dependent relationships that are not based on sexual preference, such as a son taking care of his ailing mother, or two elderly sisters living together. The needs of any two dependents would be best addressed through reciprocal benefits legislation, that does not discriminate against dependent couples that are not homosexual.

So supposedly, they and Gov. Romney are so concerned about other dependent relationships that they want to make sure that these "affected groups" receive reciprocal benefits and that granting civil unions (marriage lite) is discriminatory against these groups. My questions:

IF THEY ARE SO CONCERNED ABOUT DEPENDENT RELATIONSHIPS WHY AREN'T THEY PROPOSING LEGISLATION NOW? WHY WAIT UNTIL 2008 TO GIVE THEM BENEFITS? IS IT MORE IMPORTANT TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SAME SEX COUPLES FIRST BEFORE THEY CAN WORK ON GETTING "TWO ELDERLY SISTERS" BENEFITS?

As much as they want to deny it, Mass "Family" is for discrimination against gay people. It's not about giving a son and his dependent mother benefits, its about depriving same sex couples the same rights and responsibilities as opposite sex couples plain and simple.

No Child Left Behind if They're Dead

Well, finally a useful piece of information from Massresistance. It seems that in President Bush's "No Child Left Behind Act" high schools are required to give the federal government the names and addresses off all juniors and seniors for the purpose of recruitment into the armed forces. If you are not concerned about your child enlisting this is not a problem.

Recruiters are up-front about their plans to use school lists to aggressively pursue students through mailings, phone calls, and personal visits -- even if parents object. "The only thing that will get us to stop contacting the family is if they call their congressman," says Major Johannes Paraan, head U.S. Army recruiter for Vermont and northeastern New York. "Or maybe if the kid died, we'll take them off our list."

Kudos go out to the Principal of Lexington High School for alerting parents of this potentially lethal threat.

Ms. Massresistance is pissing and moaning over the fact that the pricipal notified parents of this action. What Ms. Massresistance refuses to accept is that the Federal government requires the principal to notify parents (from the "No Child Left Behind Act"):

(2) CONSENT- A secondary school student or the parent of the student may request that the student's name, address, and telephone listing described in paragraph (1) not be released without prior written parental consent, and the local educational agency or private school shall notify parents of the option to make a request and shall comply with any request.

In a related matter, Conservatives are joining the fray in asking the Whitehouse to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy". Apparently, we are not good enough to receive equal treatment under the law for our families but we are good enough to die on the battlefield. It seems that since the Armed services is badly in need of recruits, some people are willing to "look the other way" when it comes to gay and lesbian personnel. However, the White House isn't budging yet:

Still, the White House and the Pentagon have given no signals that they would drop their longstanding support for the policy, implemented in 1993 under the Clinton administration. It prohibits the military from inquiring about the sex lives of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay.

I can't imagine what will happen if a draft does go into effect. I guess gay and lesbian young people will be "coming out of the woodwork" instead of the closet if the ban stays in effect.

MA Family is Betting on an Alternative Marriage Question

Today's Globe states that the Mass Family Institute will be gathering signatures in Sept to try to put same sex marriage on the ballot in 2008. This action more than assures that the constitutional amendment currently before the Mass Legislature will fail in the fall.

The prospect of a new amendment with no provision for civil unions will probably undermine support for the competing, compromise measure. That compromise measure must clear the Legislature once more in order to be placed on the 2006 ballot.

It seems that Gov. Romney's Staff has been working with the anti-gay Mass Family Institute in crafting this new amendment although Romney hasn't made any statements about the new tactic.

Arline Isaacson says what all of us are thinking:

''We think they're crazy," said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. ''We're amazed that they are writing off this year's [constitutional convention] when we know they have a very good chance of winning this year and therefore banning same-sex marriages starting in 2006. We're amazed they are considering letting us get married for two more years through 2008. It will virtually guarantee that many thousands more gay people will get married."

No News is Old News

Well, the news is out. The website Republican Voices has information on the "rally" that was held in Wayland by the anti-gay bigots and it appears to be a big *yawn*. It seems they could attribute nothing new to the "radical homosexual agenda" and only filled the empty minds present with out dated information.

In the "Why Not Go With the Sure Thing Department" Article 8 is still focusing on the GLSEN conference that Brian Camenker illegally recorded in 2000. At that conference a session was held where teens could ask questions with out being judged or harassed (all the while Camenker was taping the teens without their knowledge)

The same information Camenker claims is "outrageous" could have been obtained from one of Article 8's own presenters, Dr. John Diggs. In his article entitled "The Health Risks of Gay Sex" (which is easily obtainable by any child with an internet connection) he describes various sex acts including fisting and sadism (Article 8 seems to be obsessed with fisting for some reason. I, myself, have never read more about it than from the links they and Massresistance provide).

On a side note, it doesn't appear that the "Little Black Book" can be found anywhere on the web except for Article 8's website (again freely available with an internet connection from their website).