Why LGBTQ+ advocates are pushing into shelters for homeless women?

18 03 2020

Rep Mike Quigley, recently attacked Dr. Ben Carson for not implementing laws permitting men to sleep in single sex shelter for homeless women.

Quigley, a democrat and an avowed LGBTQ+ advocate accused Carson,  United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, of delaying the implementation of an Obama era laws that granted full access rights to people who are not women but who say they are (Trans- women)  into single sex shelters for homeless women.  Carson said he has been delaying implementing the laws because it compromises the safety of women, exposing them to the real possibility of sexual assault.

Carson argued that everyone gets equal rights but no one gets extra rights. He said that throwing open the doors of single sex shelter for homeless women to biological males who claim to be women would violate the rights of women living in these shelters. It would be in fact permitting transgender rights to ride roughshod over the rights of women.  Carson recounted stories of homeless women terrified of hairy-legged men having full access to their bathroom.

however, Quigley ignored him while attempting to portray him as a bigot fostering discrimination against Trans-people who the law granted every right to be in the same shelter as women regardless of the risk.

 “Are you saying that if someone doesn’t like someone else in that shelter, for whatever reasons, that you can allow discrimination against those people,” Quigley scoffed.

“No, what I’m saying is that we have to take everybody’s feelings into consideration,” Carson replied calmly. “You can’t just select a group and say that their feelings trump everyone else’s groups.”

 Carson then called out Quigley for being passionate about transgender rights and asked him to proffer a solution that can ensure fair and equal treatment and harmonize the fear that real women have in sharing room and board with transgender. Quigley retorted that his solution is simply to apply the law and give the LGBTQ+ all they want irrespective of the objections of the traumatized and abused women.

You can watch the video below

All over the world, advocates of transgender are pushing laws and legislation to criminalize ordinary people who disagree with or hold views opposing theirs.  The powerful Trans-lobby and what they want is not acceptance but the jettisoning of values held to be true by every right thinking person.

Transgender ideologues preach that biological sex is not the same as gender and that people can be born in one sex but identify in another. Put plainly, a man can choose to be a woman anytime and in any place and the law will protect him and compel people and institutions to accord him the privilege of being a woman!

This might sound crazy to right thinking people but that is how it is. They are ready to use force, the coercive power of law to arm-twist those who do not agree. The United Nations on February 2020 released a document that claimed that religious reasons are the top reasons why people discriminate against women, girls,  gays, lesbians, bisexual and LGBTQ+ people and henceforth  urged governments the world over, to use force of law to curb religious freedom rather than violate the rights of LGBTQ+ people.

Yet many religions cannot accept this new and scientifically unproven transgender theory regardless of momentum. Christianity and specifically, the Catholic Church, holds a view confirmed by science that sex is the same as gender and that there are just two genders. According to Patrick Parkinson, a professor of law at the Queensland University in Australia,  the Christian principle of “love thy neighbor as yourself” applies regardless of people’s  sexual orientation, and no Christian can mistreat a transgender person  without violating this principle. He went on to say that, the idea that gender is fluid as touted by the transgender movement is as unscientific as it is ambiguous, and people of faith cannot accept them especially when it imposes a burden that cannot be borne without injury to conscience and faith.

Such was the case of a 24-year-old teacher in a Cathedral High School in Indianapolis who contracted a gay marriage in clear violation of what he knew was the school’s stands. The school authorities, after a long deliberation, forced to chose between interminable court cases on the one hand, and on the other, a real possibility of losing its catholic identity and scandalizing young pupils, they decided to terminate his appointment and face the music. The teacher filed a lawsuit in July last 2019. Luckily, the United States Department rallied to the defense of the school citing that the first amendment right protects faith-based group’s freedom of religion.  As of today there are numerous lawsuits that gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender and LGBTQ+ persons or their sponsors have  filed against faith based conscientious objectors coupled with intimidations, vilification and harassment of dissenting voices be it in politics or the academia.

Scientists explain Transgender as a kind of madness, as a neurological disorder. According to a research on the new Atlantis online journal, many Trans-people suffer from mental illness and suicidal ideation—symptoms not necessarily alleviated by sex change operations.  Yet rather than provide medical help to these people, the United Nation and many powerful agencies would rather force us to accept without choice or questions their theories and bend our minds to theirs.

This refuted theory, promoted by mainstream media and Hollywood, is trying to convince the world that there is a ‘gay gene’ just like there is female gene, that gays and LGBTQ+ are thus “born that way”, and thus since it is unconscionable to discriminate against women or girls because of their gender, it’s wrong to discriminate against Trans.

The problem is that unlike real women who have a fixed gender. Trans-people get to choose their gender, even without relinquishing the advantages that the birth gender gives them. Thus, a man who says he is a girl can compete in high girls high school sports against biological girls and have legal protection to do so.

The decisive factor here is that Trans-activists want to accepted as biological girls, boys, men or women and not as transgender. They are not fighting to hold on to what they believe but to destroy what everyone else believes. They wish everyone else to do them the favor of dismissing their worldview and swallowing theirs hook line and sinker and the United Nations wants to make sure they do that legally.

Yet, they say that the taste of the pudding is in the eating. Somebody regrets it all.  Walt Heyer, a business executive, a husband, and father, went from being a man to a woman at the age of 42, lived as a woman for 8 years, and did not like it. He has since returned his manhood and is now exposing the lie behind the transgender ideology. He says that transitioning to a woman did not solve his problem and even compounded them and he has since started a website to help others in his shoe who feels tired of the lies to come out and return to their normal life.

“No one can change his or her own sex, it is impossible, it is delusional, and it is a mental illness,” Walt says at the beginning of this documentary.

What drives this strange ideology?

The simple answer is money. Trans sex conversion therapy is a 200 million dollar industry and it is expanding; surge in demand means that manufacturers of hormones blockers and estrogens are making large profit; spikes in double mastectomy and genital reconstruction surgeries in Europe and America means that surgical clinics are struggling to meet demands and smiling to the banks.  Moreover, for those who change their minds, an even more expensive re-conversion procedure ensures no end to this flow of money.

 Politicians get donations and campaign funding. Transgender moneybags funded the election and re-election of Barack Obama. Former United States Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, in his book, “Duty, a Memoir,” said that Obama took anything that affected the gays or LGBTQ+ people, personal. This perhaps will account for why the former president passionately promoted LGBT+ agenda all the way to Africa.

it is however doubtful Africans will ever buy into this dangerous hoax on the scale seen in the west. Reason being that African cannot afford it. Sex conversion surgeries cost money, the kind of money only the super rich can afford.  Expectedly, it will remain a malady afflicting rich countries. Still it is doing a lot of harm. 41-year-old Marcus Fitz of California says that the clinic physically butchered him during his conversion surgeries, and that it traumatized him mentally. Many are disappointed with the result of the painful and expensive genitalia reconstruction that hardly turn out like the real thing. It is high time the world held the  United Nations and dishonest politicians like Mike Quigley accountable for their double standards in condemning female genital mutilation (FGM) in Africa whilst encouraging young boys and girls in the west to mutilate themselves by surgically removing healthy breasts and penises under the influence pseudo scientific transgender ideology.

Chinwuba iyizoba is the Editor of Authors-choice





Gay Jesus funny? Netflix is stone cold crazy!

20 12 2019

Movie streaming giant, Netflix, has lost its coconuts by streaming a third rate movie that portrays Jesus as gay.

 The movie, “The First Temptation of Christ,” offends more than 2.18 billion Christians around the world, by depicting Jesus as a homosexual and Mary as a weed smoking trollop?

 According to Citizen.org, the film presents Christ as having relationships with a homosexual while the disciples are alcoholics and unruly. The Virgin Mary is presented as an adulterous woman who has sex with God the Father. Until recently, the anti-Christian works by the small Brazilian producers of the movie were published on their YouTube channel. But this year, Netflix has decided to buy their production and distribution rights in a clear agreement to the group’s blasphemous works.

Why would Netflix want to promote a film that they know offends so many of their customers? A movie based on lies and falsification of historical facts about the life of Jesus Christ? Jesus lived and died in the 6BC-33AD, there are historical records people who lived with him and no such record exist that he is a homosexual, but quite on the contrary, homosexuality is a sin against Christian norms. Not even the Pharisee who hated Jesus so much as to kill him charged him with such. So why would anyone, 2000 yrs latter wish to offend billions believers with such an obvious lie?  But it’s only a movies, they say, nothing serious, a satire, no one should get upset. Really?

Christians have lost lives and properties defending their faith, thousand have died at the guillotine; tens of thousands were thrown to the lions for not denying their lord and savior Jesus Christ. Netflix and Porta must be stone cold crazy.     And their past streaming of hundreds of genuine Christian movies doesn’t make them less culpable for pandering this false narrative, much like a man is not less culpable when he commits murder because he saved hundreds of lives.

They wouldn’t do that to Muslims though

Netflix’s recent outrage has sparked the age-old debate on how Christian can get people to respect what they believe. Muslims have successfully won a fearful respect for their sacred through violence and bloodshed. Christians on the other hand are bound by cast iron rules of non-violence, exploited by vicious men bereft of decency to trample on their feelings with impunity.  CitizenGo, a Christian advocacy group has received two million signatures condemning the movie– significant, but hardly enough. Christians must stop and contemplate Jesus holy anger, when he sees people misusing the things of his Father. What a lesson for us never to be indifferent or cowardly when others fail to treat the things of God with due respect.

Of course violence has been tried by emperors and kings in centuries gone by and it utterly betrayed the Christian faith in spite of the good intentions of the people who deployed it.

Yet a man has the right and duty to defend the honor of his mother even if it means coming to blows. Those who go about heaping scorn on the values people cherish best beware that every man has his limits and sooner or later patience wears thin and they must have themselves to blame for what happens.

If being civilized means behaving reasonably and politely, avoiding hurting other people’s feelings, then Netflix actions are barbaric  

Two sides of the same coin

A woman writing in the punch newspaper, in words couched with thinly veiled disdain for the Christian said that the uptick in false narrative about Christianity is tit for tat for century old false narratives pandered by Christian to destroy ancient pagan religions.

But that’s a muddle up understanding of history of pagan religions. Most pagan practices actually rely on of satanic powers to achieve their purpose, and not a few practice sacrifices of blood of animal or even humans. Their code of ethics is nothing but primal instincts that often strays into outright errors, even evil.  Truth does not molest falsehood when it corrects it, knowledge cannot tolerate ignorance. The Christian faith does not denigrate pagan religion, but perfects and purify them from error to lead men to truth. The Christian faith by purifying pagan rituals from twins, virgin sacrifices and cannibalism brought about civilization.

Women the world over are enjoying the fruits of the untiring of works of Christian missionaries in educate young girls and give them opportunities denied them in traditional pagan societies.

Voodoo Afro-Brazilians pagan religions are replete with fetishes and unhygienic cavorting with dead bodies that sanitary laws demand censuring such practitioners. Still it must be pointed out that Christian ethics demands that errors of paganism must be corrected with charity. To do otherwise would go against Christ’s teaching. Truth is sacrosanct, and promoting a deliberate falsification of historically verifiable facts about Jesus’ life and teaching even as a joke is being mischievous.  When art misrepresents history, it is not illuminating but confusing.

Breaking a norm of decency is not freedom and progress, but that is a caricature of true freedom. A motorist, who thinks he is freer when he breaks traffic laws, is most likely to eventually kill himself and others.  Those applauding the wholesale ditching of good manners may find out that they have ditched civilization itself.

The Christian faith never needed to resort to violence because she never needed violence. Rather, she has been a counterforce against the violence in every man, urging the imitation Jesus Christ who, like lamb that was led to the slaughter, opened not his mouth, who though being God, became man, and went lower still accepted death on the cross, in other to redeemed man.

Those who do violence in the name of the Christ know they are violating the faith they profess. Nowhere in Christ’s teaching is any form of violence toward others encouraged, rather Christ commands love of enemies and doing good to those who hate. The power of the Christ message is the only valid defense of the Christian faith. When Christians put the teachings of Christ into practice, Christians will convert the world, and today’s Christian must convert the world– by truly striving to be saints, for this world’s crisis are crises of saints.

Chinwuba Iyizoba





No Right to Homosexual Marriage says World Court  of Human Rights 

26 09 2017

HOMOSEXUAL WEDDING – JUDGMENT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT OF STRASBOURG – FRANCE Unanimously, the World Court of Human Rights has established, verbatim, that “there is no right to homosexual marriage.”

The 47 judges of the 47 countries of the Council of Europe, which are members of the full Court of Strasbourg (the world’s most important human rights court), issued a statement of great relevance that has been surprisingly silenced by information progressivism and its area of ​​influence. In fact, unanimously, the 47 judges approved the ruling that “there is no right to homosexual marriage.”

The sentence was based on a myriad of philosophical and anthropological considerations based on natural order, common sense, scientific reports and, of course, positive law.Within the latter, in particular, the judgment was based on Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

This is equivalent to the articles of human rights treaties, as in the case of 17 of the Pact of San José and nº 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In this historic but not disclosed, Resolution, the Court decided that the concept of family not only contemplates “the traditional concept of marriage, that is, the union of a man and a woman”, but also that they should not be imposed on governments to “obligation to open marriage to persons of the same sex”.

As for the principle of non-discrimination, the Court also added that there is no discrimination, since “States are free to reserve marriage only to heterosexual couples.”

****It is important and absolutely necessary to spread this kind of news because governments and sympathizers of such lobbies will not want people to know. Help spread if you want! Obviously, it does not interest the media to publicize this news.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/european-human-rights-court-rejects-gay-marriage





The War on Children: CSE exposed,  explioting children! 

6 04 2017

​This video is worth 20 min of your time. 

Comprehensive sex education (CSE) is an aggressive attack on children’s  minds. We should join hands and STOP it. 

http://www.comprehensivesexualityeducation.org/act-now-2/stop-cse-petition/#

 





10 things at stake in the transgender bathroom

25 02 2017

This video is worth 30 mins of your time. Watch and learn the ten crucial things at stake in the on going transgender bathroom raging in the US.

all-gender





How LGBTQ Won by Peter Hitchens

21 08 2016

The Gay, Lesbian, Transgender and Queer lobby groups have won in England according to Peter Hitchens and those who oppose gay marriage or allowing young people to use drugs are in for rough times

Please watch the Peter Hitchens vs Dan Savage debate and judge for yourselves.





Gay Catholics tell synod to promote chastity: CNA

3 10 2015

ministerin to the sick

I just watched on CNN, a Catholic Priest who, Saturday, came out as gay,  accusing the Church of being homophobic for sacking him. But priest are not supposed to be in any relationship, straight or gay. They are supposed to be celibate for the kingdom of God. In any case here is what other gay catholics have to say, courtesy of CNA

Same-sex attracted Catholics who have turned away from a homosexual lifestyle are urging participants at the upcoming Synod on the Family to defend the Church’s teaching on chastity for everyone – including for divorced and remarried.

“I fear that chastity does not have enough of a voice at the Synod,” said Rilene Simpson, a member and spokesperson of Courage, an apostolate which offers pastoral support for men and women with same-sex attraction. She told CNA: “We need to have the Church’s support.” “We’re talking about chastity for everybody. We’re talking about chastity for people with same-sex attraction. We’re talking about chastity within the confines of marriage. We’re talking about chastity for people who are divorced, and remarried.”

“It is a beautiful, beautiful virtue, it’s a grace from God, it’s a way to become closer to him, and we need to hear more about chastity,” she said. Rilene, whose story is featured in the 2014 Courage-produced documentary Desire for the Everlasting Hills, was one of the main speakers at a conference held Friday in Rome aimed at presenting the Church’s pastoral resources for persons with same-sex attraction.

The international gathering, entitled “The Ways of True Love – Pastoral Approaches to Welcome and Accompany those Living with Homosexual Tendencies,” was held Friday at the Pontifical Thomas Aquinas University, also known as the Angelicum. Organized by Courage, Ignatius Press, and the Napa Institute, the gathering was intentionally scheduled to take place as close to the Synod on the Family as possible. “What I am hoping from the Synod fathers… (is) that they can see the truth and not buy into the lies,” said David Prosen, a Catholic therapist at a Franciscan University in Steubenville, who also shared his testimony at the Oct. 2 gathering.

Having himself lived a homosexual lifestyle before embracing the Church’s teaching on chastity, David – whose story is featured on the 2014 documentary The Third Way – told CNA he had once been told by a priest it was “okay to be in an intimate relationship with a man as long as you love him.” “This is so harming,” he said. “So, what I hope is that the Synod fathers will really look at the truth that we, all of us, all men and women have gifts that God has given us because we are created in his image and likeness and because we are his sons and daughters – not because of who I’m attracted to.”

David’s presentation at Friday’s gathering was entitled “I am not gay…I am David,” and touched on his own struggles with identity during his youth. “I know for myself, when I was in the culture, that whole sense of identity to me meant belonging,” he told CNA. “I didn’t really fit in in high school. Finally I felt like I belonged somewhere but it wasn’t giving me what I really needed. I found out years later that the reason is because that’s not who I am. I was embracing something that wasn’t true.”

David explained how in high school he had admired traits in other people that he felt he lacked in himself. “I was looking at my peers and going ‘gosh if only I looked like him, if I was athletic like him, or popular then maybe I would fit in,’ and there was this shame,” he said. “In puberty, that piece became exaggerated and that’s when I believed something that really wasn’t true.” “I wasn’t really affirmed in my gender and that’s what I was looking for all along.” David explained he has since learned to establish fulfilling and chaste friendships with other men, largely through the help of the Courage apostolate. “There is a profound joy and peace in living a chaste life,” he said.

Friday’s conference comes partly in response to the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on the Family, in which persons with same-sex attraction did not have an adequate voice, according to organizers. At least two of the Synod fathers will take part in the event: French Guinea’s Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Pontifical Council for Divine Worship, and Australia’s Cardinal George Pell, prefect for the Secretariat for the Economy. In brief remarks given to journalists at the conference, Cardinal Pell stressed that the Church has long offered support to persons with same-sex attraction. “It’s happening already…in many places,” he said. “No non-government institution offers more avenues of care of, say, HIV people, in parishes, communities, groups like Courage, Christian families,” etc. “We’re obliged to. Because we’re Christians.” The conference also featured a presentation by Monsignor Livio Melina, president of Rome’s John Paul II Institute on Marriage and the Family, who spoke on the Christian anthropological understanding of homosexuality. Other experts included Dr. Paul McHugh of Johns Hopkins; Dr. Timothy Lock, a clinical psychologist; and Dr. Jennifer Morse of the Ruth Institute. Friday’s conference comes one day ahead of another gathering in Rome entitled Ways of Love, whose organizers support a form of pastoral care which does not necessarily preclude sexually intimate relationships between same-sex couples. This year’s Synod on the Family, to be held on Oct. 4-25, will be the second and larger of two such gatherings to take place in the course of a year. Like its 2014 precursor, the focus of the 2015 Synod of Bishops will be the family, this time with the theme: “The vocation and mission of the family in the Church and the modern world..CNA





Kim Davis: Alone Against Tyranny: Why She Should Never Resign By Phil Lawler

9 09 2015

Kimdavis alone

So if she could not, in good conscience, issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, why didn’t Kim Davis resign from her job as county clerk? I’m not privy to her reasoning, but I have my own reasons why she should not be expected to resign.

Ordinarily, when a public official faces a crisis of conscience, the cause is either a change of responsibilities or a change of heart. Suppose a building inspector is asked to approve construction under a new code, and he firmly believes that the new buildings will be unsafe. If he cannot convince his superiors to amend the code, he should resign; he cannot carry out his responsibilities in good conscience. Or suppose (to use an example borrowed from a friend) an executioner experiences a religious conversion, and decides that capital punishment is immoral. He too should resign; he cannot carry out the duties for which he was hired.

Kim Davis cannot, in good conscience, certify that two people of the same sex are eligible for marriage. It is perfectly reasonable to argue—as Ryan Anderson has persuasively argued—that the courts should find some accommodation, so that she can preserve her integrity and yet homosexuals can obtain marriage licenses. Indeed, as I write this little essay, I learn that Judge Bunning, who sent her behind bars, has now ordered her release, provided that she no longer interferes with the process of issuing licenses. But that does not resolve the problem, in my view.

Imagine that you teach arithmetic in an elementary school. Imagine that a few misguided individuals take control of the local school committee, and push through a nonsensical new curriculum that makes it more difficult for students to learn the basics of math. You can complain, you can work to elect more sensible people to the school committee, but as long as the new curriculum is in force, you have to choose: comply with your new job description, or resign.

But now imagine that the school committee, drunk with power, rules that henceforth you must teach students that 2+2=5. You cannot do that. Moreover, you cannot meekly step aside and allow some other, more compliant teacher to tell young children that 2+2=5. This is not a matter of preference or of personal belief. It’s a matter of fact.

Kim Davis was asked to certify that two men, or two women, could be appropriate partners in a marriage. She could not, because to do so would contradict what she knew—what you and I know, what everyone has known for centuries—about the nature of marriage. Nor could she allow her deputies, working under her direct supervision, to testify to an untruth.

Father James Schall made this point for Catholic World Report:

Let’s begin with the word “marriage.” This word means the union of a man and a woman for the purpose of begetting, raising, and educating their children in a home. If an “arrangement” between two human beings cannot instigate or beget a human child, it is not a marriage. If we insist on calling it a “marriage,” we speak equivocally. That is, we lie to ourselves about what is.
The word “belief” is not the appropriate word for marriage. Marriage is a fact, not a “belief.” To imply that it is a “belief” means, in modern context, that it has no grounding in reality. It is improper to call marriage a “belief.”

Virtually every newspaper account of the confrontation in Kentucky has made the point that Kim Davis is a Christian. That is true but irrelevant. It is not because of her religious faith that Davis understands the nature of marriage. Non-Christians, too, have always understood (until the mania of the past few years) that marriage is a union of man and woman. That understanding was firmly in place long before the time of Christ.

If a court can redefine marriage, it can redefine any institution touched by the law. If the term “marriage” means no more or less than what five justices happen to prefer at the moment, then the most fundamental institution in society is at risk.

Are you really married, or could the state suddenly declare your union invalid? Could the government take custody of your children, having ruled that there is nothing special about the bond between parent and child?

With the Obergefell decision the Supreme Court overthrew not only the laws of the several states, but the laws of logic as well. In a blatant display of illegitimate power, five justices ordered not merely a redefinition of “marriage” but a redefinition of reality. And to date, no one but Kim Davis has actively resisted that usurpation.

Article courtesy of By Phil Lawler





“We are Now Enemies of the State” Kim Davis

8 09 2015

Enemy of the state

The drama of the jailing of Kim Davis is just a fraction of the forms of persecution that have manifested against Christians who oppose gay marriage in the past few years. Will it decrease or increase with the promotion of homosexuality? Here are some examples

  1. FREE SPEECH AND DISCRIMINATION DUE TO RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
    1. Christian fired for refusing sex therapy to homosexual couples.
      1. “The next hearing will be this Thursday, when Christian relationship counselor Gary McFarlane will appeal his firing for refusing sex therapy to homosexual couples. Last week, Christian nurse Shirley Chaplin lost her appeal to wear a crucifix around her neck in hospital wards.”
        1. http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2010/04/discrimination.html
    2. Fla. Teacher Suspended for Posting Anti-Gay Marriage Views on Facebook.
      1. “‘It was my own personal comment on my own personal time on my own personal computer in my own personal house, exercising what I believed as a social studies teacher to be my First Amendment rights,’ Buell told Fox.”
      2. “Chris Patton, a communications officer for the school system, told Fox there was concern about how Buell might treat gay students in his class. He also disputed the notion that the comments were private.
        “He has [more than] 700 friends,” Patton said. “How private is that–really? Social media can be troubling if you don’t respect it and know that just because you think you are in a private realm–it’s not private.”
        He vowed Buell will not return to the classroom until “a thorough job of looking at everything–past or previous writings” is complete.

        1. http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=28314aze.com/stories/fla-teacher-suspended-for-posting-anti-gay-marriage-views-on-facebook/
    3. School suspends a black woman who objected to the idea that homosexuality is a civil right.
      1. “The University of Toledo has taken action against an administrator that has aroused concern over free speech violations. The victim is the school’s associate vice president of human resources, Crystal Dixon, who wrote to a local newspaper in response to an article that claimed homosexuals to be victims of civil rights abuses. In the letter, Dixon, who is black, objected to the article’s claim that homosexual civil rights are being trampled on. In her view, civil rights and homosexuality do not fit into the same box.”
      2. Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America is outraged that the University of Toledo would suspend her over the letter . . . the entire incident is “inappropriate and has a chilling effect on free speech.”
        1. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=110624
    4. Texas School punishes Christian teen for voicing his opinion against homosexuality.
      1. “An honors student in Fort Worth, Texas, was sent to the principal’s office and punished for telling a classmate that he believes homosexuality is wrong . . . Dakota was in a German class at the high school when the conversation shifted to religion and homosexuality in Germany. At some point during the conversation, he turned to a friend and said that he was a Christian and ‘being a homosexual is wrong.’ ‘It wasn’t directed to anyone except my friend who was sitting behind me,’ Dakota told Fox. ‘I guess [the teacher] heard me. He started yelling. He told me he was going to write me an infraction and send me to the office.’”
        1. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/22/texas-school-punishes-boy-for-opposing-homosexuality/
    5. University removes Christian from counseling program due to his belief that homosexuality is immoral.
      1. Article Titled “Is Discrimination Against Christians Legal?” 7/20/2010. “A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday’s ruling, according to Julea Ward’s attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.”
        1. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/is-discrimination-against-christians-legal/
    6. Marine court-martialed for refusing to remove Bible verse.
      1. “The plight of Lance Corporal Monifa Sterling seems unbelievable–a member of the Armed Forces criminally prosecuted for displaying a slightly altered passage of Scripture from the Old Testament: “No weapon formed against me shall prosper. Sterling, who represented herself at trial, was convicted February 1, 2014 in a court-martial at Camp Lejune, North Carolina after she refused to obey orders from a staff sergeant to remove the Bible verses from her desk . . . The Christian Marine was given a bad conduct discharge and a reduction in rank from lance corporal to private. ”
        1. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/05/26/marine-court-martialed-for-refusing-to-remove-bible-verse.html?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork, 5/26/2015
  2. GAY ACTIVISTS ON THE ATTACK.
    1. Attacking Christian Charities.
      1. ‘Gay’ activists kill cash sources for Christian charities. Internet-based campaigns scare away corporate donors with ‘hate group’ charge
        1. http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=339641#ixzz1XLBuQpkr
    2. Bricks thrown through door and windows of Christian facility.
      1. “Police are searching for the culprits who threw concrete bricks through the door and windows of a Christian facility in Illinois as it prepared for a banquet for a group dedicated to exposing the homosexual activist agenda . . . LaBarbera notes that a left-wing website with a letter from a group of homosexuals taking credit for the attack warns that more will follow if the host site for the banquet does not disassociate from its featured speaker, Scott Lively, and AFTAH.
        1. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1461944
    3. Pressuring Paypal.com to not handle traditional value groups.
      1. “Homosexual activists are pressuring PayPal to not handle donations made to groups that promote traditional values . . . Founder Peter LaBarbera [of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality] refers to it as “homofascism in action,” as it asks people to stop financially supporting Christian groups, which the homosexual activists refer to as “hate groups.”
        1. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Business/Default.aspx?id=1433084
      2. “PayPal officially states that its users “may not use the PayPal service for activities that [ . . . ] promote hate, violence, racial intolerance” but PayPal has become a favorite payment service for anti-LGBT extremists all over the world. PayPal must act immediately to shut down their accounts and ban all sites that promote anti-LGBT hate.
        1. http://allout.org/en/actions/paypal
  3. GENERAL.
    1. “Stern says if the early cases are any guide, the outlook is grim for religious groups. A few cases: Yeshiva University was ordered to allow same-sex couples in its married dormitory. A Christian school has been sued for expelling two allegedly lesbian students. Catholic Charities abandoned its adoption service in Massachusetts after it was told to place children with same-sex couples. The same happened with a private company operating in California.”
      1. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486191
  4. MUSIC.
    1. The band The Dire Straights song “Money for Nothing” banned due to word “faggot”.
      1. “The Dire Straits hit ‘Money for Nothing’ can now be played in Canada after a ban for its use of the word ‘faggot’ was lifted. The song from the 1980s was pulled from radio playlists in January after just one unidentified listener complained about the use of the slang word for homosexual.”
      2. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2033245/Dire-Straits-song-ban-lifted-Canada.html. Courtesy of Matt Slick




Story of Boy Raised a Girl will Break Your Heart

25 08 2015

bruce jenner

Why do people still go around preaching gender neutrality when the man who first came up with it was clearly proven wrong and was also a sick child abuser; and the child, David Reimer, who was the first guinea pig of this novel experiment committed suicide?  Here is his story by John Colapinto that is sure to break your heart:

Brenda-Reimer

Just shy of a month ago, I got a call from David Reimer’s father telling me that David had taken his own life. I was shocked, but I cannot say I was surprised. Anyone familiar with David’s life—as a baby, after a botched circumcision, he underwent an operation to change him from boy to girl—would have understood that the real mystery was how he managed to stay alive for 38 years, given the physical and mental torments he suffered in childhood and that haunted him the rest of his life. I’d argue that a less courageous person than David would have put an end to things long ago.

After David’s suicide, press reports cited an array of reasons for his despair: bad investments, marital problems, his brother’s death two years earlier. Surprisingly little emphasis was given to the extraordinary circumstances of his upbringing. This was unfortunate because to understand David’s suicide, you first need to know his anguished history, which I chronicled in my book As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised As a Girl.

David Reimer was one of the most famous patients in the annals of medicine. Born in 1965 in Winnipeg, he was 8 months old when a doctor used an electrocautery needle, instead of a scalpel, to excise his foreskin during a routine circumcision, burning off his entire penis as a result. David’s parents (farm kids barely out of their teens) were referred to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, home of the world’s leading expert in gender identity, psychologist Dr. John Money, who recommended a surgical sex change, from male to female. David’s parents eventually agreed to the radical procedure, believing Dr. Money’s claims that this was their sole hope for raising a child who could have heterosexual intercourse—albeit as a sterile woman with a synthetic vagina and a body feminized with estrogen supplements.

For Dr. Money, David was the ultimate experiment to prove that nurture, not nature, determines gender identity and sexual orientation—an experiment all the more irresistible because David was an identical twin. His brother, Brian, would provide the perfect matched control, a genetic clone raised as a boy.

David’s infant “sex reassignment” was the first ever conducted on a developmentally normal child. (Money had helped to pioneer the procedure in hermaphrodites.) And according to Money’s published reports through the 1970s, the experiment was a success. The twins were happy in their assigned roles: Brian a rough and tumble boy, his sister Brenda a happy little girl. Money was featured in Time magazine and included a chapter on the twins in his famous textbook Man & Woman, Boy & Girl.

David Reimer

The reality was far more complicated. At age 2, Brenda angrily tore off her dresses. She refused to play with dolls and would beat up her brother and seize his toy cars and guns. In school, she was relentlessly teased for her masculine gait, tastes, and behaviors. She complained to her parents and teachers that she felt like a boy; the adults—on Dr. Money’s strict orders of secrecy—insisted that she was only going through a phase. Meanwhile, Brenda’s guilt-ridden mother attempted suicide; her father lapsed into mute alcoholism; the neglected Brian eventually descended into drug use, pretty crime, and clinical depression.

When Brenda was 14, a local psychiatrist convinced her parents that their daughter must be told the truth. David later said about the revelation: “Suddenly it all made sense why I felt the way I did. I wasn’t some sort of weirdo. I wasn’t crazy.”

David soon embarked on the painful process of converting back to his biological sex. A double mastectomy removed the breasts that had grown as a result of estrogen therapy; multiple operations, involving grafts and plastic prosthesis, created an artificial penis and testicles. Regular testosterone injections masculinized his musculature. Yet David was depressed over what he believed was the impossibility of his ever marrying. He twice attempted suicide in his early 20s.

David did eventually marry a big-hearted woman named Jane, but his dark moods persisted. He was plagued by shaming memories of the frightening annual visits to Dr. Money, who used pictures of naked adults to “reinforce” Brenda’s gender identity and who pressed her to have further surgery on her “vagina.”

When David was almost 30, he met Dr. Milton Diamond, a psychologist at the University of Hawaii and a longtime rival of Dr. Money. A biologist by training, Diamond had always been curious about the fate of the famous twin, especially after Money mysteriously stopped publishing follow-ups in the late 1970s. Through Diamond, David learned that the supposed success of his sex reassignment had been used to legitimize the widespread use of infant sex change in cases of hermaphroditism and genital injury. Outraged, David agreed to participate in a follow-up by Dr. Diamond, whose myth-shattering paper (co-authored by Dr. Keith Sigmundson) was published in Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine in March 1997 and was featured on front pages across the globe.

I met David soon after, when he agreed to be interviewed by me for a feature story in Rolling Stone. He subsequently agreed to collaborate with me on a book about his life, As Nature Made Him, published in February 2000. In the course of our interviews, David told me that he could never forget his nightmare childhood, and he sometimes hinted that he was living on borrowed time.

Most suicides, experts say, have multiple motives, which come together in a perfect storm of misery. So it was with David. After his twin Brian died of an overdose of antidepressants in the spring of 2002, David sank into a depression. Though the two had been estranged, David had, in recent months, taken to visiting Brian’s grave, leaving flowers and, at some point prior to his own suicide, a note.

David also had marital difficulties. He was not easy to live with, given his explosive anger, his cyclical depressions, his fears of abandonment—all of which Jane weathered for almost 14 years. But with David spiraling ever deeper into sloth and despair, she told him on the weekend of May 2 that they should separate for a time. David stormed out of the house. Two days later, Jane received a call from the police, saying that they had found David but that he did not want her to know his location. Two hours after that, Jane got another call. This time the police told her that David was dead.

David Reimer before he killed himself

Genetics almost certainly contributed to David’s suicide. His mother has been a clinical depressive all her life; his brother suffered from the same disease. How much of the Reimers’ misery was due to inherited depression, and how much to the nightmare circumstances into which they had been thrown? David’s mutilation and his parents’ guilt were tightly entwined, multiplying the mental anguish to which the family members were already prone.

In some press reports, financial problems were given as the sole motive in David’s suicide. While this is absurdly reductive, it is true that last fall David learned that he was the victim of an alleged con man who had hoodwinked him out of $65,000—a loss that ate at him and no doubt contributed to his despair.

In his final months, David was unemployed—for him, a disastrous circumstance. When I first met him, seven years ago, he was a janitor in a slaughter house—tough, physically demanding work that he loved. But when the plant closed a few years ago, David never found another full-time job. And thanks to me, he didn’t have to. I split all profits from the book with David, 50-50. This brought him a substantial amount of money, as did a subsequent movie deal with Peter Jackson, the director of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. With no compelling financial need to work, David was able to sit around his house and brood—a state of affairs for which I feel some guilt.

In the end, of course, it was what David was inclined to brood about that killed him. David’s blighted childhood was never far from his mind. Just before he died, he talked to his wife about his sexual “inadequacy,” his inability to be a true husband. Jane tried to reassure him. But David was already heading for the door.

On the morning of May 5, he retrieved a shotgun from his home while Jane was at work and took it into the garage. There, with the terrible, methodical fixedness of the suicide, he sawed off the barrel. Then he drove to the nearby parking lot of a grocery store, parked, raised the gun, and, I hope, ended his sufferings forever.

John Colapinto is the author of As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised a Girl. He is a contributing editor at Rolling Stone magazine where his original story about David Reimer won a national magazine award for reporting. His 2001 novel About the Authoris being developed for the screen by Dreamworks.

Story is courtesy of www.slate.com





Incest Next: USA Taking the Plunge

29 06 2015

taking the plung

In 1997, Wisconsin officials, acting on reports of an abandoned child, got more than they bargained for: not only did the child show signs of extreme neglect, she turned out to be the product of an incestuous marriage between siblings.
In addition to terminating Allen and Patricia Muth’s parental rights, Wisconsin tried and convicted them of criminal incest. Since the Muths didn’t challenge the facts of the case, you would think that settled the matter. But it didn’t.
Both at trial and on appeal, the Muth’s challenged the constitutionality of the Wisconsin law. That’s right: they argued that there’s a constitutional right to incest. While this may sound shocking, it shouldn’t be surprising, not if you take the Supreme Court at its word.
Two years ago, in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned Texas’ law against sodomy, Justice Kennedy didn’t say that there was a fundamental right to homosexual sodomy. He did something even worse: he wrote that people are “free as adults to engage in private conduct in the exercise of their liberty under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.”
Kennedy said that these adults “are entitled to respect for their private lives” and that “the State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.”
Justice Scalia warned, in a blistering dissent, that the case language would encompass any consensual sexual practice, including incest or polygamy. And that’s exactly what the Muth’s lawyers argued —- first before the Wisconsin Supreme Court and then before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Earlier this summer, the Seventh Circuit rejected Muth’s argument, thankfully, but only because Judge Daniel Manion said that Lawrence didn’t apply only because this case “did not [specifically] address the constitutionality of incest statutes.” Legal scholar Matthew Franck wrote that this is “true but trivial.” The issue is whether Lawrence’s reasoning should be applied to cases not involving homosexuality.
Given Kennedy’s sweeping rhetoric about “private lives” and demeaning someone’s existence, the answer would appear to be “yes.” Substitute “incestuous” for “homosexual” in Kennedy’s opinion and its meaning remains exactly the same. And, as Kennedy wrote, “profound and deep convictions” about the immorality of a practice isn’t a constitutionally-sufficient reason to criminalize that practice.
Some believe that Judge Manion knew this and ruled against the Muths on other grounds because Manion “would rather someone other than himself,” preferably, the Supreme Court, commit such a travesty.
No one is sure what the Supreme Court will actually do with the Muth’s case. If it follows Kennedy’s logic in Lawrence, however, it will declare incest constitutional —- so we may be only one case away from this moral horror.
This is why the upcoming confirmation process is so important. Today, all that stands between us and the logical inevitability of the protection of incest is one more vote in the High Court. Read more>>








%d bloggers like this: