| ||||||||||||
Superb pro-family election victories (and a few losses) across the country on Nov.3See reports below on:
POSTED: November 5, 2009
| ||||||||||||
Brian Camenker of MassResistance addresses press conference in Maine State House on Oct. 28 as Paul Madore of Maine GrassRoots Coalition (next to him) and Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (far left) look on. |
|
And last weekend, as we reported in our previous email, MassResistance joined the Maine GrassRoots Coalition and Americans for Truth at the Maine State House for a blockbuster press conference warning the voters of Maine about the implications of the upcoming election and exposing sources of funding from radical groups.
In addition, many of the videos posted by YesOnOne included MassResistance material:
VIDEO: Maine Marriage Equality--What about the schools?
VIDEO: YesOnOne, using MassResistance clips from Youth Pride
Press release from Matt Barber and Liberty Counsel thanks MassResistance for effective action
Already, however, there is debate about the tactics used by the pro-family forces in Maine.
On Wednesday, Matt Barber of Liberty Council issued a scathing press release suggesting that the margin of victory could have been greater had they used a more aggressive and truthful approach. Barber called into question the ideological "Neville Chamberlain approach" by those running the Yes campaign that where they "circled the wagons around the word 'marriage,' even suggesting that 'domestic partnerships' ('gay marriages' by another name) are acceptable."
Here's an example of a StandForMarriage ad that Barber is referring to.
VIDEO: StandForMarriage ad: "It's Possible"
In the press release Barber added,
". . . This is an historic battle for the minds and souls of our children - for our very culture. The mealy-mouthed approach must end. This is not just about 'marriage.' It has everything to do with forced affirmation of homosexuality - under penalty of law. Indeed everyone who fought hard to defend marriage in Maine is to be congratulated, but if it weren't for a brave group of truth tellers - Paul Madore, Peter LaBarbera and Brian Camenker - who came to Maine in the final hour to hold a press conference and address the pink elephant in the room - homosexual deviancy and the radical 'gay' agenda - counterfeit marriage might have prevailed."
Read press release here: Counterfeit 'Marriage' Rejected in Maine
Right now, we're all happy for a great victory. But given the close calls in recent "gay marriage" statewide elections, this debate needs to continue. We'll keep you informed.
2. Washington State: Tuesday's vote on Civil Union law still too close to call. MassResistance material used in radio ads!
Last May the Washington Legislature passed a greatly expanded domestic partners and civil unions law. It makes civil unions / domestic partnerships legally equivalent to marriage. A coalition of pro-family groups and activists gathered over 121,000 signatures to put it on the ballot.
It's been a huge uphill battle for them. Washington is a fairly liberal state. And because this isn't "marriage" - just civil unions -- and the national groups haven't given them a great deal of support or money. They've been outspent about 5 to 1 by the homosexual lobby. Because of funding issues, they've had to rely mostly on radio ads.
A few months ago we started working with Joseph Backholm, Executive Director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington. He told us that they felt they needed to warn people what "gay marriage" does when it's imposed on a state - particularly regarding parental rights and religious freedom. And a great deal of the material they used for their radio ads and other advertising came from the MassResistance website. "Thank you for having it," he told us.
Example of handout from Family Policy Institute of Washington with MassResistance material
The Washington activists have fought a fearless, principled fight. They've told it like it is. As we write this the vote is still too close to call because in Washington State a large percentage of the ballots (about 50%) are mailed in. It could even be several days before they know for sure, he said. The good news, he added, is that historically conservatives seem to vote later.
We'll keep you up to date on this!
3. Tough pro-family losses in local elections: Revere MA, Newton MA, Kalamazoo MI
In local races we were following, there were three tough losses for the pro-family forces.
REVERE, MA: Vote on contraceptives at Revere High School
Earlier this year the Revere School Committee dropped a bombshell on the community. Without any warning, they voted to distribute contraceptives and the "morning after pill" to students in Revere High School. As Kathy Magno, an activist in Revere, told us, this was done without any notice to the community. There were no public hearings. No sub-committee meetings about it. It wasn't even on the agenda that day.
They didn't even run it by a citizens' advisory committee, as provided for in Massachusetts Law. They just did it.
Kathy and other parents got enough signatures to force this to a city-wide election. Here's what they wanted: That the School Committee temporarily suspend the program and create an advisory council to study the risks and benefits of the program and make a recommendation back to the School Committee. They also want some public forums on this to be held.
Incredible arrogance by officials
As reported in a recent article in the local Revere Journal newspaper, the arrogance of the Revere public officials over this is quite breathtaking, even by Massachusetts standards. The mayor, who also chairs the School Committee, has flatly refused to give in to any requests by the parents, even in the face of an apparent conflict of interest over the program.
And (also reported in the article) the Superintendent of Schools went on an angry anti-Catholic diatribe during a public meeting, accusing the Catholic Church of lying about the issue in its church bulletin. “They will stoop to anything to get their moral issue across and take away parents’ rights,” he said. “I have a problem with people lying over a podium.”
A tough loss for parents
The election was Tuesday. As expected, the media and liberal establishment largely misrepresented it to voters, and the Boston Globe also brought up the completely unscientific Youth Risk Behavior surveys to add to the confusion. And naturally, the media tossed in a dash of fear and emotion whenever they could. As a result, the parents lost the election.
See Boston Globe article here
NEWTON, MA: Liberal establishment stops School Committee candidate
Former Newton Tab columnist Tom Mountain ran for one of the eight city-wide School Committee positions. In one of the most politically-correct pro-homosexual cities in Massachusetts (Barney Frank's home town!) Tom exposed everything in his five-year stint as a weekly newspaper columnist. For example:
Tom Mountain article: Elementary school teaching cross-dressing and transgenderism in the 3rd grade!
After he stopped writing, he decided to run for School Committee. His platform for the schools stressed fiscal responsibility, stopping the homosexual agenda, the Planned Parenthood agenda, and the out-of-control political correctness in the schools (e.g., anti-racist math problems, anti-European history, etc.), improving the curriculums, studying the costs of special education, and more patriotism.
After Tom made it through the primary by a wide margin, the liberal establishment got serious. If Tom got a seat on the School Committee it would be their worst nightmare. So the newspaper pounded him with personal attacks, the school networks campaigned against him and twisted his positions, and a special political action committee was even set up to make sure he was defeated.
It was too much. In Tuesday's election, Tom lost by 11964-4719. But he has a hard-core base of support and we're hoping he'll be back in two years.
There's some diversity that the liberal establishment in Newton, MA just won't tolerate! |
|
KALAMAZOO, MI: Valiant fight against radical "non-discrimination" law
Gary Glenn of the American Family Association (AFA) of Michigan is one of the best political strategists and organizers we have. He has won pro-family election victories in liberal towns for decades.
Earlier this year when the Kalamazoo, MI city council unanimously enacted a radical pro-homosexual, pro-transgender "non-discrimination" law, Glenn's group gathered enough signatures to force a city-wide election. They got together a great coalition of multi-racial, multi-religious groups and put up a very strong fight.
But unfortunately it wasn't enough to overcome their obstacles. Kalamazoo is a very liberal college town and it's estimated that the homosexual lobby outspent the pro-family forces by at least 10-1.
This was a rare defeat for Gary Glenn. We're sure we'll be hearing more from him before too long.
OneNewsNow: Family advocates come up short in Kalamazoo
4. Pro-family victory in Virginia AG race: Politician fearlessly tells truth and wins despite vicious attacks in media
This is an election story that politicians across the country need to pay attention to.
Ken Cuccinelli is a devout Catholic and a family man with unyielding moral convictions. And he's fearless.
While running for Virginia Attorney General he was asked about his position on homosexuality. He didn't do what most politicians running for high office do. He didn't back down or run for cover. He told the truth. He said that he thinks homosexuality is wrong, unnatural, and inimical to society and civilization.
He was savaged by the liberal media. Below is a Washington Post editorial that was published last week. It's very vicious, but not unexpected from the mainstream media. Most politicians would think their political career would be in big trouble after this hit the streets just days before the election.
But how did the voters react? In Tuesday's statewide election Ken Cuccinelli won in a landslide: 70% - 30% against his Democratic opponent. (Newspaper report.)
Standing up to the liberal establishment is something we need to demand of politicians. Too many politicians are cowards when it comes to these issues. We all owe Ken Cuccinelli a debt of gratitude for his unwavering principles.
Here's the Washington Post editorial attacking Ken Cuccinelli a few days before the election (who subsequently won by 30 points):
Mr. Cuccinelli's bigotry
As attorney general, he would be an embarrassment to Virginia.
Washington Post
Friday, October 30, 2009
KENNETH CUCCINELLI, the Republican candidate for Virginia state attorney general, believes it's "appropriate" to formulate public policy on the premise that homosexuals engage in behavior that is "intrinsically wrong" and offensive to "natural law." His comments -- which retrofit the old rhetoric of racism, bias and intolerance in a new context -- were made in an interview with the Virginian-Pilot, a newspaper in Norfolk.
Homosexual acts, said Mr. Cuccinelli, currently a state senator, are "intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that. . . . They don't comport with natural law. I happen to think that it represents (to put it politely; I need my thesaurus to be polite) behavior that is not healthy to an individual and in aggregate is not healthy to society."
Putting aside what Mr. Cuccinelli has to say about homosexuals when he's not trying so hard to be polite, let's call his comments what they are: bigotry. Bigotry is as pernicious today, applied to homosexuals, as it was a century ago or less, when immigrants and minorities were its main victims. And it is just as familiar. Appeals to "natural law" and "intrinsic" rights and wrongs were the usual clichés deployed to justify the old-time religion of hatred then directed at African Americans, Jews, Italians, Irish and other immigrants.
It is especially alarming that this ugly nonsense is coming from Mr. Cuccinelli, who, if he becomes the attorney general of Virginia -- a job that combines aspects of chief government lawyer and top cop -- would be in a position to act on it. He says he would not ask job applicants to the 166-lawyer office about their sexuality, and his spokesman says openly gay employees would not be "rooted out" and fired. But, since he would be empowered to issue opinions on such questions, how would he regard such firings generally in state government, in which a 110,000-strong workforce undoubtedly includes thousands of homosexuals?
As a candidate for attorney general, Mr. Cuccinelli has profited from an affability and quick wit that have tended to mask his extremist views. As a lawmaker in Richmond, he has displayed contempt for non-English speakers; for those who care about global warming; and for the First Amendment. Many of his fellow Republicans regard him as occupying the far-right fringe of the party, the ultimate small tenter. The more immediate concern is this: If he is elected attorney general, Mr. Cuccinelli would drive away qualified lawyers from an office that functions as the state government's law firm, and, given his bizarre ideas, he would very likely become an embarrassment for the commonwealth.
Link to Washington Post version online
| Top |