(A4a1e) sexual indoctrination

As of this date, 07-01-14, this folder contains 9 items. ******* item 1 KINSEY: PROFITING FROM RAPE ******* item 2 THE CLOSING DOWN OF FREE SPEECH? SURREY SCHOOL BOARD "GUILTY" OF DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOUR ******* item 3 KINSEY'S SECRET: THE PHONY SCIENCE OF THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION ******* item 4 QUEERING THE SCHOOLS ******* item 5 "HOMOSEXUAL" IS NOT A NOUN ******* item 6 BRITISH COLUMBIA CANADA'S MANDATORY HOMOSEXUAL CURRICULUM WITH NO OPT-OUT ******* item 7 PROGRESSIVE CONSEQUENCES OF MARRIAGE LAW ******* item 8 KINSEY LIES - AND THE TRUTH MUST COME OUT ******* item 9 MUZZLING FREE SPEECH *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 1 KINSEY: PROFITING FROM RAPE ******* By Joseph Farah ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 ******* To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40968 ******* copyright 2004 WorldNetDaily.com ******* Hollywood is about to release its tribute to the man who launched the "sexual revolution." ******* The film is called "Kinsey," a name mostly associated with shattering our archaic ideas about sex and popularizing the notion that values were really just old-fashioned "hang-ups." ******* The truth is that Alfred Kinsey was not a legitimate researcher. He was not some kind of pioneer and scholar in the area of human sexuality. He was not a heroic figure who transformed society for the better. ******* He was a monster. ******* He protected pedophiles ******* He was a pervert. ******* He was a beast akin to Dr. Josef Mengele � and that's the way he should be remembered. ******* For years, the foremost scholar in the area of Kinsey, Dr. Judith Reisman, has been trying to blow the whistle on the author of 1948's explosive book, "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male." ******* She shows that the book was actually a record of unspeakable sexual human experiments conducted by sexual predators on hundreds, perhaps thousands, of children. ******* The study was used by Kinsey to support the idea that sexual activity in children � even with adults � is natural and healthy and should not be repressed. ******** Reisman, along with Dr. Laura Schlessinger, has attempted to alert the public, as well as the movie's producers and actor Liam Neeson, to the hard truth about Kinsey, the subject of this sympathetic portrayal on the big screen. ******* Not only is the movie about to whitewash Kinsey's record, it's also getting a facelift from the rest of the media, backed by multimillion-dollar grants from the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Indiana University's Kinsey Institute. ******* Kinsey used data from the diaries of pedophiles like Rex King and Nazi Fritz von Balluseck, who was tried for the rape and murder of a 10-year-old girl. King's data appears in a table in "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" that summarized his attempts to bring to orgasm boys between the ages of 2 months and 15 years, in some cases over a period of 24 hours. ******* Kinsey falsely claimed the information came from multiple sources. But even retired Kinsey Institute director John Bancroft admitted in 1995 that it all came from King. ******* Though Reisman has twice been denied screenings of the film due out next month, reports about it suggest it is the story of a "tragic hero" who overcame the religious rigidity of his Methodist father to pave the way for sexual freedom. ******* Reisman acknowledges that our society has become sufficiently jaded that most will watch the movie and accept it at face value. What audiences will not be told, however, is that Kinsey passed off the rape and sexual victimization of children as science. ******* The filmmakers continue in the cover-up of this crime against humanity. They continue in to collaborate with evil. They do it knowing the truth. They do it without excuse. They do it to entertain. They do it intentionally to revise history. And they do it for profit. ******* That's disgusting. But what should we expect from fans of the master of disgust, Alfred Kinsey? ******* Purchase your copy of Dr. Judith Reisman's "Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences." ******* Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND and a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. He is also the founder of WND Books. In addition to his daily column in WND, he writes a nationally syndicated weekly column available to U.S. newspapers through Creators Syndicate. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 2 THE CLOSING DOWN OF FREE SPEECH? SURREY SCHOOL BOARD "GUILTY" OF DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOUR ******* From: "BCPTL ListMaster" - British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life October-November, 2004 E-Mail Bulletin ******* Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 ******* Please visit us at our website: www.bcptl.org ******* E-mail address: [email protected] ******* Phone (voice and fax): 604-512-9594. ******* We appreciate your taking the time to read the BCPTL monthly Bulletin. If you find the Bulletin informative and helpful, we would appreciate it if you would e-mail it to others. If you know of anyone who would like to be put on our e-mail distribution list, please let us know. ******* A local school board is ordered to implement a policy that a great many parents and other citizens object to. The board decides to hold public meetings to air the issue. Isn�t that a course of action which a democratically elected body might be expected to follow? But Surrey School Board in British Columbia has been hauled before a Human Rights Tribunal for doing just that. ******* The Supreme Court of Canada had ordered the School Board to reconsider its refusal to approve as teaching materials three books promoted by the pro-homosexuality lobby. One might have thought that public input was appropriate to such a reconsideration. .But, according to the press, the lawyer for the complainants said �that . . . central to his case was the issue of why the meetings even took place since the Supreme Court justices ordered the board to review its decision and made no mention of any necessity for public input.� Since when, one might ask, must a local government wait for a Supreme Court order before it provides for public input on a public issue? ******* In any public meeting there is an element of unpredictability, and those who hold one position are liable to be sometimes offended by the views of those on the other side. This should not give those so offended the right to shut down debate, particularly on the spurious grounds that disagreement with their views or life-style is necessarily evidence of hatred. As the lawyer for the school board is quoted as saying, �. . . the free _expression of opinion within a democratic system contemplates debate which may offend others.� The only society where a group is completely protected against offence would be an extremely repressive one. Yet the complainants appear to think that the possibility of their having hurt feelings is sufficient grounds to shut down public discussion of a controversial issue. ******* At the school-board meeting where BC Parents and Teachers for Life presented their brief (entitled �Why Surrey School Board Ought Not to Approve Pro-Homosexuality Books and Other Pro-Homosexuality Resources for Use as Teaching Materials in the School District�) there were a great many substantive points made by people who opposed a school board�s being forced to propagandize for a favourable view of homosexual behaviour. Apparently the complainants to the Human Rights Tribunal wish that no such views should be heard. What we are seeing, without a doubt, is an attempt by a small lobby group to shut down public debate on a public issue. The totalitarian nature of their thinking should be disturbing to anyone with a modicum of concern for freedom of speech. ***************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 3 KINSEY'S SECRET: THE PHONY SCIENCE OF THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION ******* From: Judith Reisman via "Robert A Jason" ******* Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 ******* Dear Friends: ******* Dr. Judith Reisman is a hero of mine. ******* She was the researcher who exposed Alfred Kinsey as a fraud in her seminal work, KINSEY, SEX AND FRAUD - THE INDOCTRINATION OF A PEOPLE. Her latest book is the equally meticulously researched work, KINSEY: CRIMES & CONSEQUENCES. I have both of these well-thumbed books in my library. Dr. Reisman deserves a medal for her enormous contributions to the cause of truth. ******* The following expose of Kinsey by an investigative journalist Sue Ellin Browder builds on the firm foundations laid by Dr. Reisman. ******* <><> ******* It�s now more than 50 years since the revolution began. Sexual �liberation� has been endlessly ballyhooed by the national media, promoted in the movies, embraced by Playboy guys and Cosmo girls as a freedom more delicious than Eden�s apple. No American under 40 can honestly remember a time when sex on TV was taboo, when �living together� meant married, when �gay� meant happy, and when almost every child lived with both parents. ******* If truth be told, the revolution has been a disaster. Before the push to loosen America�s sexual mores really got under way in the 1950s, the only widely reported sexually transmitted diseases in the United States were gonorrhea and syphilis. Today we have more than two dozen varieties, from pelvic inflammatory disease (which renders more than 100,000 American women infertile each year) to AIDS (which presently infects 42 million people worldwide and has already killed another 23 million). According to a report by scientists at the National Cancer Institute, a woman who has three or more sex partners in her lifetime increases her risk of cervical cancer by as much as 1,500 percent. In another finding that runs contrary to all that the sex researchers preached, a survey at the University of Chicago�s National Opinion Research Center showed that married men and women, on average, are sexually happier than unwed couples merely living together. And even if live-in couples do marry, they�re 40 to 85 percent more likely to divorce than those who go straight to the altar. ******* So what happened? Was science simply wrong? Well, not exactly�the truth is more complicated than that. ******* And much more interesting. ******* Con Man ******* Alfred C. Kinsey had a secret. The Indiana University zoologist and �father of the sexual revolution� almost single-handedly redefined the sexual mores of everyday Americans. The problem was, he had to lie to do it. The weight of this point must not be underestimated. The science that launched the sexual revolution has been used for the past 50 years to sway court decisions, pass legislation, introduce sex education into our schools, and even push for a redefinition of marriage. Kinseyism was the very foundation of this effort. If his science was flawed�or worse yet, an outright deception�then our culture�s attitudes about sex are not just wrong morally but scientifically as well. ******* Let�s consider the facts. When Kinsey and his coworkers published Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953, they turned middle-class values upside down. Many traditionally forbidden sexual practices, Kinsey and his colleagues proclaimed, were surprisingly commonplace; 85 percent of men and 48 percent of women said they�d had premarital sex, and 50 percent of men and 40 percent of women had been unfaithful after marriage. Incredibly, 71 percent of women claimed their affair hadn�t hurt their marriage, and a few even said it had helped. What�s more, 69 percent of men had been with prostitutes, 10 percent had been homosexual for at least three years, and 17 percent of farm boys had experienced sex with animals. Implicit in Kinsey�s report was the notion that these behaviors were biologically �normal� and hurt no one. Therefore, people should act on their impulses with no inhibition or guilt. ******* The 1948 report on men came out to rave reviews and sold an astonishing 200,000 copies in two months. Kinsey�s name was everywhere from the titles of pop songs (�Ooh, Dr. Kinsey�) to the pages of Life, Time, Newsweek, and the New Yorker. Kinsey was �presenting facts,� Look magazine proclaimed. He was �revealing not what should be but what is.� Dubbed �Dr. Sex� and applauded for his personal courage, the researcher was compared to Darwin, Galileo, and Freud. ******* But beneath the popular approbation, many astute scientists were warning that Kinsey�s research was gravely flawed. The list of critics, Kinsey biographer James H. Jones observes, �read like a Who�s Who of American intellectual life.� They included anthropologists Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict; Stanford University psychologist Lewis M. Terman; Karl Menninger, M.D. (founder of the famed Menninger Institute); psychiatrists Eric Fromm and Lawrence Kubie; cultural critic Lionel Trilling of Columbia University, and countless others. ******* By the time Kinsey�s volume about women was published, many journalists had abandoned the admiring throngs and joined the critics. Magazine articles appeared with titles like �Is the Kinsey Report a Hoax?� and �Love Is Not a Statistic.� Time magazine ran a series of stories exposing Kinsey�s dubious science (one was titled �Sex or Snake Oil?�). ******* That�s not, of course, to say that the Kinsey reports contain no truth at all. Sexuality is certainly a subject worthy of scientific study. And many people do pay lip service to sexual purity while secretly behaving altogether differently in their private lives. ******* Nevertheless, Kinsey�s version of the truth was so grossly oversimplified, exaggerated, and mixed with falsehoods, it�s difficult to sort fact from fiction. Distinguished British anthropologist Geoffrey Gorer put it well when he called the reports propaganda masquerading as science. Indeed, the flaws in Kinsey�s work stirred up such controversy that the Rockefeller Foundation, which had backed the original research, withdrew its funding of $100,000 a year. A year after the book on female sexuality came out, Kinsey himself complained that almost no scientist outside of a few of his best friends continued to defend him. ******* So, what were the issues the world�s best scientists had with Kinsey�s work? The criticism can be condensed into three devastating points. ******* Problem #1: Humans as Animals ******* Before he began studying human sexuality, Kinsey was the world�s leading expert on the gall wasp. Trained as a zoologist, he saw sex purely as a physiological �animal� response. Throughout his books, he continually refers to the �human animal.� In fact, in Kinsey�s opinion, there was no moral difference between one sexual outlet and any other. In our secular world of moral relativism, Kinsey was a radical sexual relativist. As even the libertarian anthropologist Margaret Mead accurately observed, in Kinsey�s view there was no moral difference between a man having sex with a woman�or a sheep. ******* In his volume about women, Kinsey likened the human orgasm to sneezing. Noting that this ludicrous description left out the obvious psychological aspects of human sexuality, Brooklyn College anthropologist George Simpson observed, �This is truly a monkey-theory of orgasm.� Human beings, of course, differ from animals in two very important ways: We can think rationally, and we have free will. But in Kinsey�s worldview, humans differed from animals only when it came to procreation. Animals have sex only to procreate. On the other hand, human procreation got little notice from Kinsey. In his 842-page volume on female sexuality, motherhood wasn�t mentioned once. ******* Problem #2: Skewed Samples ******* Kinsey often presented his statistics as if they applied to average moms, dads, sisters, and brothers. In doing so, he claimed 95 percent of American men had violated sex-crime laws that could land them in jail. Thus Americans were told they had to change their sex-offender laws to �fit the facts.� But, in reality, Kinsey�s reports never applied to average people in the general population. In fact, many of the men Kinsey surveyed were actually prison inmates. Wardell B. Pomeroy, Kinsey co-author and an eyewitness to the research, wrote that by 1946 the team had taken sexual histories from about 1,400 imprisoned sex offenders. Kinsey never revealed how many of these criminals were included in his total sample of �about 5,300� white males. But he did admit including �several hundred� male prostitutes. Additionally, at least 317 of Kinsey�s male subjects were not even adults, but sexually abused children. ******* Piling error on top of error, about 75 percent of Kinsey�s adult male subjects volunteered to give their sexual histories. As Stanford University psychologist Lewis M. Terman observed, volunteers for sex studies are two to four times more sexually active than non-volunteers. ******* Kinsey�s work didn�t improve in his volume on women. In fact, he interviewed so few average women that he actually had to redefine �married� to include any woman who had lived with a man for more than a year. This change added prostitutes to his sample of �married� women. ******* In the December 11, 1949, New York Times, W. Allen Wallis, then chairman of the University of Chicago�s committee on statistics, dismissed �the entire method of collecting and presenting the statistics which underlie Dr. Kinsey�s conclusions.� Wallis noted, �There are six major aspects of any statistical research, and Kinsey fails on four.� ******* In short, Kinsey�s team researched the most exotic sexual behavior in America�taking hundreds if not thousands of case histories from sexual deviants�and then passed off the behavior as sexually �normal,� �natural,� and �average� (and hence socially and morally acceptable). ******* Problem #3: Faulty Statistics ******* Given all this, it�s hardly surprising that Kinsey�s statistics were so seriously flawed that no reputable scientific survey has ever been able to duplicate them. ******* Kinsey claimed, for instance, that 10 percent of men between the ages of 16 and 55 were homosexual. Yet in one of the most thorough nationwide surveys on male sexual behavior ever conducted, scientists at Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers in Seattle found that men who considered themselves exclusively homosexual accounted for only 1 percent of the population. In 1993, Time magazine reported, �Recent surveys from France, Britain, Canada, Norway and Denmark all point to numbers lower than 10 percent and tend to come out in the 1 to 4 percent range.� The incidence of homosexuality among adults is actually �between 1 and 3 percent,� says University of Delaware sociology and criminal justice professor Joel Best, author of Damned Lies and Statistics. Best observes, however, that gay and lesbian activists prefer to use Kinsey�s long-discredited one-in-ten figure �because it suggests that homosexuals are a substantial minority group, roughly equal in number to African Americans�too large to be ignored.� ******* Not surprisingly, Kinsey�s numbers showing marital infidelity to be harmless also never held up. In one Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy study of infidelity, 85 percent of marriages were damaged as a result, and 34 percent ended in divorce. Even spouses who stayed together usually described their marriages afterwards as unhappy. Atlanta psychiatrist Frank Pittman, M.D., estimates that among couples who have been married for a long time and then divorce, �over 90 percent of the divorces involve infidelities.� ******* Speaking at a 1955 conference sponsored by Planned Parenthood, Kinsey pulled another statistical bombshell out of his hat. He claimed that of all pregnant women, roughly 95 percent of singles and 25 percent of those who were married secretly aborted their babies. A whopping 87 percent of these abortions, he claimed, were performed by bona fide doctors. Thus he gave scientific authority to the notion that abortion was already a common medical procedure�and should thus be legal. ******* Living with the Wreckage ******* When Reader�s Digest asked popular sex therapist Ruth Westheimer what she thought of Kinsey�s misinformation, she reportedly replied, �I don�t care much about what is correct and is not correct. Without him, I wouldn�t be Dr. Ruth.� ******* But Kinsey�s deceptions do matter today, because we�re still living with the Kinsey model of sexuality. It permeates our entire culture. As Best observes, bad statistics are significant for many reasons: �They can be used to stir up public outrage or fear, they can distort our understanding of our world, and they can lead us to make poor policy choices.� ******* In a 1951 Journal of Social Psychology study, psychology students at the University of California, Los Angeles, were divided into three groups: Some students took an intensive nine-week course on Kinsey�s findings, while the other two groups received no formal Kinsey instruction. Afterward, the students took a quiz testing their attitudes about sex. Compared with those who received no Kinsey training, those steeped in Kinseyism were seven times as likely to view premarital sex more favorably than they did before and twice as likely to look more favorably on adultery. After Kinsey, the percentage of students open to a homosexual experience soared from 0 to 15 percent. Students taught Kinseyism were also less likely to let religion influence their sexual behavior and less apt to follow sexual rules taught by their parents. ******* Influencing Court Decisions ******* Kinsey�s pseudoscience arguably did the most damage through our court systems. That�s where attorneys used the researcher�s �facts� to repeal or weaken laws against abortion, pornography, obscenity, divorce, adultery, and sodomy. In the May 1950 issue of Scientific Monthly, New York City attorney Morris Ernst (who represented Kinsey, Margaret Sanger, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Planned Parenthood) outlined his ambitious legal plan for Kinsey�s findings. �We must remember that there are two parts to law,� Ernst said. One was �the finding of the facts� (Kinsey�s job); the other was applying those findings in court (Ernst�s job). Noting that the law needed more tools �to aid in its search for the truth,� the attorney argued for �new rules,� under which �facts� like Kinsey�s would be introduced into court cases in the same way judges allowed other scientific tools, such as fingerprints, lie-detector results, and blood tests. The inexhaustible Ernst also urged the courts to revise laws concerning the institution of marriage. ******* The legal fallout from Kinsey�s work continues. The U.S. Supreme Court�s historic decision last year striking down sodomy laws was the offshoot of a long string of court cases won largely on the basis of Kinsey�s research. And 50 years of precedents set by Kinsey�s �false 10 percent� are now being used in states like Massachusetts to redefine marriage. ******* A Sorry Legacy ******* Inspired by the first Kinsey report, Hugh Hefner founded Playboy in 1953. A decade later, Helen Gurley Brown turned Cosmopolitan into a sex magazine for women. Even today magazines like Self and Glamour continue to quote Kinsey with respect, never acknowledging the grave errors riddling his research. An estimated 30,000 Web sites offer pornography, and U.S. producers churn out 600 hard-core adult videos each month. Although reliable figures are difficult to come by, the U.S. sex industry pulls in an estimated $2.5 billion to $10 billion a year. Clearly, we�re living Kinsey�s legacy. ******* In his book The End of Sex, an obituary of the sexual revolution, Esquire contributor George Leonard accurately observed that �wherever we have split �sex� from love, creation, and the rest of life...we have trivialized and depersonalized the act of love itself.� Treasuring others solely for their sexuality strips them of their humanity. When Kinsey tore the mystery of love from human sexuality, he abandoned us all to a sexually broken world. It�s time to heal. ******* SIDEBAR: The Dark Side of Alfred Kinsey ******* Was Alfred Kinsey a dedicated truth-seeker who was simply side-tracked by bad science? Or did he have a more disturbing side? These questions�long debated among critics and supporters�are coming to light once again with a new film about Kinsey�s life. Tentatively titled Kinsey and starring Liam Neeson, the movie will reportedly lionize the controversial figure. ******* Even before its scheduled fall release, the film is provoking heated debate, with critics charging that it�s merely Hollywood�s attempt to whitewash the reputation of a man who was a practicing homosexual, sadomasochist, and voyeur who advocated�and possibly even directed�the sexual abuse of children. ******* Leading this charge is internationally known pornography researcher Judith Reisman, Ph.D. She has been studying Kinsey�s work and its effects on our culture for 25 years. (Her initial research on pornography was financed by an $800,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.) ******* In an open letter to Neeson, Reisman urged the actor to reconsider his decision to play Kinsey. Referring to the infamous Dr. Josef Mengele, the Nazi Auschwitz concentration camp doctor, Reisman told Neeson that playing Kinsey would put him in a �hideously inaccurate role, much like playing the monster Mengele as a mere controversial figure.� Neeson chose to remain with the project. ******* According to Reisman, Kinsey trained pedophile observers who sexually abused more than 300 minors to prove that children �enjoy� sex with adults. �Some of the victims were only two months old, and some were subjected to more than 24 hours of nonstop sexual atrocities,� Reisman says. �One Kinsey contributor was a World War II Nazi officer. His young victims had to choose between rape and the gas chamber.� ******* As extravagant as Reisman�s claims may seem, they�re not without warrant. In Kinsey�s 1948 book, Sexual Behavior of the Human Male, he recounts the experiments of nine pedophiles he employed for his research. �Some of these adults,� Kinsey wrote, �are technically trained persons who have kept diaries or other records which have been put at our disposal.� He includes a chart that indicates that these �trained� pedophiles were inducing orgasms in babies as young as five months of age. One four-year-old is reported to have had 26 orgasms in 24 hours. ******* And just how were children and infants judged to be having orgasms? For that, Kinsey looked for several behaviors: violent convulsions, groaning, sobbing, violent cries, �an abundance of tears,� extreme trembling, fainting, excruciating pain, and screaming. In other words, what any normal adult would view as a child�s severe reactions to trauma, Kinsey saw as children enjoying themselves. ******* When Reisman first saw these data, she was horrified. Where, after all, did this information come from? Who�s waking up that little kid and molesting him for 24 hours around the clock? What parents would permit their children to be part of such a brutal experiment? And why did these nauseating crimes go unaddressed in the countless reports of Kinsey�s work? ******* She got some answers in December 1990 while on the Phil Donahue show. One of the other guests, Clarence Tripp, a photographer who knew Kinsey, said this information was gathered by pedophiles using stop watches to record the children�s responses. �So it was very scientific,� Tripp noted. ******* (Reisman�s child-abuse charges against Kinsey were also validated by several Kinsey-research eyewitnesses interviewed in the 1998 British television documentary, Secret Histories: Kinsey�s Paedophiles.) ******* On the other hand, historian James H. Jones, the Pulitzer-Prize finalist who spent 25 years researching Kinsey�s biography, says, �There is just no evidence of which I am aware� that Kinsey trained and directed pedophiles to collect data. He believes the pedophile charges against Kinsey are �not credible� and tends to believe the Kinsey Institute�s version of the story. In 1995, the institute�s director went public with his belief that Kinsey had based much of these data on the diaries of one anonymous pedophile who had kept detailed records of his sexual abuse of 317 children from 1917 to 1948. ******* Whether Kinsey personally directed the abuse of children may never be known. Nevertheless, any film based entirely on Kinsey�s public image will be factually wrong. In public, Kinsey presented himself as a stable married man, a disinterested scientist just reporting �the facts.� But, privately, Jones�s research revealed Kinsey to be a homosexual, voyeur, and sadomasochist who unquestionably plunged �into the abyss with regard to incest and child molestation.� Kinsey�s own sadomasochism led him to bizarre extremes. After the Rockefeller Foundation withdrew his funding, Jones reports, Kinsey went to a basement, tied one end of a rope to an exposed ceiling pipe and the other end around his scrotum, then stood on a chair and jumped off. As for his homosexuality, were Kinsey and his coauthor, Wardell Pomeroy, lovers? �They were sex partners, but I wouldn�t call them lovers,� Jones says. �They weren�t that close.� ******* Sue Ellin Browder is an award-winning investigative journalist and coauthor, with her husband, Walter, of 101 Secrets a Good Dad Knows. **************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 4 QUEERING THE SCHOOLS ******* This article covers in a comprehensive fashion the theoretical basis for promoting in schools the tolerance, then acceptance and then the celebration of sexual disorientation and the resultant sexual anarchy. Read the article "Queering the Schools" at http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_queering_the_schools.html **************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 5 "HOMOSEXUAL" IS NOT A NOUN ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 ******* Winning the Battle of Words ******* By Allan Dobras ******* As the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment to the United States Constitution is debated, the public and Congress will be subjected to a relentless public relations assault from homosexual advocacy groups claiming that the marriage amendment would discriminate against same-sex couples. Implicit in these claims is the presumption that the term �homosexuals� refers to an identifiable class of people�a claim that even its staunchest supporters know is a myth. ******* Lost in the debate is the fact that in its original context, homosexual�as well as its nearly synonymous counterpart, gay�was most often used as an adjective and referred to erotic desires for the same sex. In the past, it was common to refer to someone who practiced homosexual activity as a sodomite, and the act of homosexuality�i.e., unnatural carnal copulation�as sodomy. ******* Actually, both homosexual and heterosexual are relatively new terms, having found their way into the lexicon in the 1930s. The associated term gay, did not come into common usage until the mid-1970s. ******* The use of those words as nouns has come into relatively common usage in recent years, in large part due to homosexual practitioners and their apologists who know that any debate centered on the homosexual lifestyle would be a lost cause. For obvious reasons, therefore, it was politically necessary to perpetrate the myth that homosexuality is an inborn state of being and a civil rights issue rather than an atypical sexual behavior, like pederasty�sexual activity between a man and a boy. ******* Myth Becomes Reality ******* The public relations machine of the Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual, and Transgender movement (GLBT) achieved an important victory last year when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that unnatural carnal copulation, i.e. sodomy, was a constitutionally guaranteed right and its practitioners are to be regarded as a protected minority group. Justice Sandra Day O�Connor, writing for the majority, said "Moral disapproval of a group cannot be a legitimate governmental interest under the Equal Protection Clause because legal classifications must not be 'drawn for the purpose of disadvantaging the group burdened by the law'." ******* In addition, there have been a plethora of statements by GLBT groups and their sympathizers that have perpetrated the false impression that science has proven that homosexual practitioners are born into the lifestyle and cannot change their sexual preferences. As �proof,� several scientific studies have been cited: studies of the hypothalamus; identification of a �gay� gene; hormone research; studies of identical twins; and studies in brain chemistry. ******* The common thread that ties these studies together is that not one produced any result that established a biological link to sexual orientation. What has been shown is that the most prevalent common denominators in homosexual orientation are dysfunctional relationships with the same-sex parent and early childhood sexual abuse. Three facts about homosexuality are indisputable: ******** There is no scientific evidence that supports the conclusion that homosexuality is inborn or that it is unchangeable. ******* A person can be seduced into the homosexual lifestyle. ******* A person can leave the homosexual lifestyle and live a fully productive and fulfilling heterosexual life, albeit not without difficulty, as with any life-altering addiction. ******* Homosexuals Can Only be Identified by Behavior ******* In the legal pursuit of GLBT rights, it is well known that no one can prove that he/she is a so-called homosexual. The Maryland Anti-discrimination law of 2001, for example, provides no procedure to establish how an individual can be identified as male or female homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual. In fact, the law essentially recognized the futility of attempting to verify an individual�s sexual orientation when it added the following waiver: ******* An employer shall be immune from liability, under this article or under the common law, arising out of the employer's reasonable acts to verify the sexual orientation of any employee or applicant taken by the employer in response to a charge filed against the employer on the basis of sexual orientation. ******* The California Domestic Partners Law cites a domestic partnership as a declaration of shared responsibility between two persons of the same sex�the declaration is not made between two homosexuals since it is not possible to rationally classify someone by using such a designation. In fact, the California law makes no mention of either homosexuals or sexual orientation in the legislation. ******* The recently passed Senate hate crimes bill, S.966, provides additional penalties for �offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.� The crafters of the bill, recognizing that sexual orientation is an indeterminate term, added the word perceived as a descriptor to the protected categories. Again, the word homosexual is nowhere found in the legislation. ******* The Homosexual Lifestyle ******* Since it is indisputable that homosexuality is solely a declared statement of a person�s behavior and not an innate characteristic of a class of people, it is of paramount importance that we understand what that behavior is and its physical and societal ramifications before any actions are take to legitimize the lifestyle. There is a wide body of readily available evidence that places the homosexual lifestyle in perspective: ******* No matter what image of the homosexual lifestyle GLBT groups may want to project to the public, the facts are that the great majority of homosexuals engage in risky sexual practices that most people would consider beyond bizarre. A frank and open look at the homosexual lifestyle can be found at the web site of the Family Research Institute. ******* Promiscuity, pornography, and the elusive pursuit of sexual fulfillment fuel the engine of the homosexual lifestyle. It is not uncommon for homosexuals to have hundreds, if not thousands, of casual sexual encounters during their lifetime, whether in a �committed� relationship or not. Sexual fidelity has little meaning in homosexual relationships. ******* Dr. Tim Dailey, Senior Fellow for Cultural Studies at the Family Research Council, has documented certain studies that describe the many health and societal risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle. In his recent book, Dark Obsession, Dr. Dailey notes "Human Papillomavirus (HPV)�which can lead to anal cancer�infects over 90 percent of HIV-positive gay men, and 65 percent of HIV-negative gay men. Gay men are at increased risk for contracting hepatitis�a potentially fatal liver disease that increases the risk of liver cancer. ******* Homosexuals acquire syphilis at a rate ten times that of heterosexuals. Men who have sex with men comprise the single largest exposure category of people with AIDS. Homosexual men with HIV have a 37-fold increase in anal cancer, a 4-fold increase in Hodgkins disease, a 2.7-fold increase in cancer of the testicles, and a 2.5-fold increase in lip cancer. Thirty-six percent of homosexuals engaging in unprotected oral, anal, or vaginal sex failed to disclose that they were HIV positive to casual sex partners. The incidence of anal cancer in homosexuals is 35 times greater than that of the general population. ******* Lesbians have more male sex partners then their heterosexual counterparts, putting lesbians at greater risk for contracting STDs. Lesbians are three times more likely to abuse alcohol. Homosexual and lesbian relationships are far more violent than traditional married households. Seventy-five percent of lesbians have pursued psychological counseling of some kind�many for treatment of long-term depression. ******* Life expectancy for gay and bi-sexual men is eight to twenty years less than average. There is a significantly higher rate of suicide for homosexual men than heterosexual men. Having a homosexual parent or parents appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50. ******* These behavioral, physical, and societal ramifications paint a dismal picture of a lifestyle that is portrayed to the public as equivalent to the traditional nuclear family. ******* Unfortunately, if the Federal Marriage Amendment does not become the law of the land, homosexual unions will soon hold a place alongside true marriage between a man and a woman�the God-blessed family unit that has been the backbone of civilized society since the dawn of creation. This will have happened in large part because of a debate that never took place� a debate that would have revealed the facts about the homosexual behavior before we so recklessly enshrined it into law. ******* Al Dobras is a freelance writer on religious and cultural issues and an electronics engineer. He lives in Springfield, Virginia. **************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 6 BRITISH COLUMBIA CANADA'S MANDATORY HOMOSEXUAL CURRICULUM WITH NO OPT-OUT By Terry Vanderheyden and John-Henry Westen ******* From: LifeSite News via John Hof, Robert Jason and Linda Harvey ******* Government Agrees to Mandatory Homosexual Curriculum with No Opt-Out for Students or Parents ******* VANCOUVER, June 1, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A homosexual teacher and his same-sex partner who launched a human rights complaint with the British Columbia government have settled with the Government of British Columbia. According to the homosexual activist who launched a human rights suit, homosexual issues will soon be a mandatory part of school curricula taught in classrooms throughout the province, without the ability of students or parents to opt out. ******* BC's Ministry of Education and Ministry of the Attorney-General agreed to review the province's curricula to ensure that the issue of homosexuality is included in all so-called 'social justice' discussions - such as those involving racial inequality and women's rights. The decision was the result of a settlement reached with Murray and Peter Corren, who launched their formal human rights complaint in 1999, which alleged "systemic sexual discrimination" in the classroom. ******* However, a key element in the Corren complaint was the attempt to ensure that the courses teaching positively about homosexuality are mandatory, and that neither students nor parents are able to opt-out. Speaking at the time of the launch of the human rights action, last July, the activists' legal council, Tim Timberg, said, "The second issue is there's an opting-out provision in the curriculum that where a subject is deemed to be sensitive, the school teachers are under an obligation to in advance advise parents that they'll be raising a sensitive issue in the classroom." ******* Coquitlam teacher Murray Corren told the Vancouver Sun today that the settlement will also make it more difficult for students and parents to opt out of lessons dealing with sexual orientation. ******* Attorney-General Wally Oppal said Wednesday that the province was indeed shaping a new 'social justice' course that will incorporate the homosexual issues. "I think it's a fair settlement," he claimed. "We listened to their [the Correns'] complaints and we decided there was some merit in what they were suggesting." Oppal added that he hoped British Columbians were a "mature enough society" to accept "that there is an understanding that there is a place for this in our curriculum." ******* A press release from the BC Government notes that in addition to revamping the provinces educational curriculum to ensure it "reflects inclusion" for the homosexual lifestyle, the province is commencing immediately to offer an elective grade 12 course on "justice and equality" which will address "sexual orientation. ******* Corinna Filion, spokesman for the Ministry of Education told LifeSiteNews.com that the agreement included provisions to bar some parents and students who had been opting for home education or other arrangements on topics of sexuality. While the province will still allow parents and students those alternative options when it comes to sex education (health and career courses), students will be forced to remain in classes dealing with sexual orientation outside of sexual education in spite of any objections students or their parents my have. ******* "For example in social studies if they are reading a book about same sex families . . . the policy (of allowing for alternative arrangements) would not apply," explained Filion. ******* A copy of the agreement was not available to reporters by press time. ********************************************************************************************************* ******* item 7 PROGRESSIVE CONSEQUENCES OF MARRIAGE LAW ******* From: CFAC [mailto:[email protected]] via "deanne" �?******* Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 ******* I am forwarding an alert received from Canada Family Action Coalition. In order to understand the extent to which our education system is in jeopardy, please read the Education Articles posted at : http://www.familyaction.org/Articles/education.htm - Deanne ******* ACTION ALERT ******* The event below is a logical progression of the �new� marriage law C38.� Children will be put at risk if this is allowed to proceed. And it is not just in Manitoba that this is being planned. The BC government has signed a legal contract with two homosexual activists to write and review public education curriculum for K � 12 to ensure �queer� culture and behavior is included in teaching. Indoctrination of public education children is here folks � wake up. ******* If you have children in public school I will argue strenuously � they are at risk. ******* Beware of the pornographic and graphic nature of the contents below and in the Black Book.� ******* CFAC�- Stop Government Funded Same Sex Indoctrination ******* Last year, in defiance of public opinion, the government passed a law redefining��� marriage. Because educators are now required to teach the new law to all students, they are looking for curriculum to teach children same-sex relations.� The material developed with assistance from the government is called �The Little Black�. ******* The Little Black Book � Pornographic Propaganda Paid for by Taxpayer Dollars ******* This past year the federal, provincial and municipal governments provided St. Stephen�s House in Toronto with funding of $7.8 million. One of the �educational� projects undertaken by this organization was the production and distribution of �The Little Black Book � A Book on Healthy Sexuality�. This book purports to be a guide to personal and sexual development for teenage girls. In reality, it is a shockingly pornographic and deeply offensive piece of political and cultural propaganda. ******* Deceiving Teens; Undermining Parents ******* The Little Black Book is a virtual �how to� guide for homosexual activity. It teaches that only 10 % of the population is heterosexual compared with 10 % who are homosexual. The rest, 80 % are bi-sexual. It includes a chapter entitled �My First Time Fucking a Girl� written by a girl, �and provides explicit instructions on how to perform oral, anal and other sex acts. This is promotion of lesbian homosexual behavior. ******* Those who counsel against such activity, especially parents, are derisively dismissed as bigots. �A lot of parents are homophobic, and so are their children - until they get minds of their own,� the book states. This is an affront to parents and violates parents rights. � ******* In addition the book advises, �If you need a figure to represent God The Holiness then for me she�s a fat, black dyke.� ******* Promoting Irresponsible Sexual Activity ******* �The Little Black Book� teaches girls in graphic language the use of condoms and dental dams (for oral-vaginal or oral-anal sex). The World Health Organization warns that condom use may reduce the risk of getting AIDS by only 80 %, leaving a 20% chance of contracting this fatal disease. This study, moreover, assumes that condoms are used �consistently and correctly� and that they are not damaged in any way. These facts are not presented in this guide, leading children to mistakenly believe that they can engage in so-called �safe sex� without risk. In one particularly egregious passage, girls are advised �for extra fun, cut out the crotch of your undies and sew on a dental dam�.� If followed these instructions could lead to the complete failure of the device and infection of its unsuspecting users. ******* Government Stamp of Approval? ******* �The Little Black Book� was developed with the financial assistance of all three levels of government and its online version is being sponsored by Industry Canada . It is only logical, therefore, that government educators will interpret this as a stamp of �official approval� and will use this offensive curriculum.� The Ministry of Education in Manitoba is now making this available to children in grades 9 � 12 and a similar education project is in Alberta we believe. ******* Would you knowingly expose your children to such material? ******* The Defend Marriage Coalition is calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to stop the same-sex indoctrination of Canada �s children, to withdraw all funding of organizations producing sexually explicit material and to examine the societal impact of re-defining marriage. ******* What can you do?� ( go to www.defendmarriage.ca for hot buttons). ******* 1.����� Call your Member of Parliament and MPP or MLA. ******* 2.����� Become a member of Defend Marriage. ******* 3.����� Donate to the �Stop Same-Sex Indoctrination� campaign ******* 4.����� Download the petition, fill it out and submit it. ******* With your help we will fight the same sex indoctrination of our children. If we remain silent while our children are violated then we are complicit in their psychological abuse.� Children have enough to contend with on the internet, video games, Hollywood and peer pressure.� The last thing they need is same-sex indoctrination by the government.� If we work together we will have victory. ******* How much is the protection of our children worth?� I am going to do everything I can.� I trust you will as well. ******* Dr. Charles McVety, Senior Director, Defend Marriage and President, Canada Family Action Coalition ******* Warning! The material you are about to view is graphic in nature and may offend some viewers. ******* 1. Gayness page http://www.ststephenshouse.com/littleblackbook/little_black_book/04_sexid/04_gayness.html ******* 2.� First time �� page http://www.ststephenshouse.com/littleblackbook/little_black_book/04_sexid/04_firsttime01.html ******* 3. St. Stephens House Financial Statements for the year ending March 31, 2006 ******* Government Funding ******* City of Toronto fees ���������������� $1,175,744 ******* Federal Government ��������������� $1,543,108 ******* Province of Ontario ���������������� $3,968,825 ******* City of Toronto ����������������������� $1,156,454 ******* Total��� $7,841,131 ******* �http://www.ststephenshouse.com/forms/stst_ar2006_final.pdf ******* 4. Global News Report� http://www.canada.com/globaltv/manitoba/story.html?id=64b05a32-34dd-4d57-9573-f03ade82472� ********************************************************************************************************* ******* item 8 KINSEY LIES - AND THE TRUTH MUST COME OUT ******* Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 ******* From: "AmericanDecency.org" ******* Request our September bulletin insert "Exposing Kinsey's guilt" by emailing me at: [email protected] ******* "... On November 12th, Hollywood will release a movie intended to convince the public that sex researcher Alfred Kinsey was an American hero when, in fact, his 'research' was fraudulent and without question has been a major contributor to the rapid moral decline of America...." ******* As per my email Friday (August 13, 2004), http://www.americandecency.org/email_updates/email08.13.04.htm you know that Dr. Judith A. Reisman, is the individual who has labored behind the scenes to tell the world of Kinsey's lies. I urge you to visit Dr. Reisman's highly informational website at: http://www.drjudithreisman.com/ ******* Personal note: ******* I am a former public school teacher of 18 years, a parent of four children (with one still at home). My concern for the incredible influences of our culture upon children has never been greater. Their sense of personhood, truth, faith, morality, sexuality, etc., can be greatly influenced by cultural influences. ******* A personal example ******* I remember studying about Alfred C. Kinsey and his sex research as a student at Michigan State University. I didn't question its validity at the time. I was young. I was in a university setting. My instructor was a ph.d. I naively trusted. ******* Sex can be a destructive fire outside of the context of marriage; particularly outside of the context of a godly marriage. But, as you know, there is a battle for truth around this vitally important and private area of our lives. ******* Many increasingly, though, are understanding the damage done by Alfred C. Kinsey. They, like myself, will do all they can to expose Kinsey's crimes and the consequences of those crimes. ********************************************************************************************************* ******* item 9 MUZZLING FREE SPEECH by Jim Enos and sent by Robert A. Jason ******* date December 17, 2006 ******* Bravo for Gwen Landolt's article in Hamilton Spectator ******* The Spectator's decision to print Gwen Landolt's article is impressive. Gwen's article is accurate regarding the muzzling of free speech at many levels. The name-calling responses of those who do not support evidence-based logic is the lowest level of debate which results when one has no basis from which to argue. This effort to set aside evidence regarding homosexual and bi-sexual conduct is evident within the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board as our Council has witnessed on several occasions while serving on the Sexual Orientation Committee formulating policy for this strand of the Board's Equity Policy. ******* While there is strong evidence regarding homosexual and bi-sexual conduct risk physically, emotionally and spiritually, it is the medical evidence which should concern people from all backgrounds if they were able to remove their politically tinted glasses and consider it. One only has to look at the Canadian Blood Services questionnaire which asks 2 very pointed questions: ******* 18) Male donors : Have you had sex with a man even one time since 1977? ******* 21) Female donors : In the last 12 months, have you had sex with a man who had sex, even one time since 1977 with another man. ******* If the potential donor answers yes to either question they are rejected as a blood donor. ******* This question is not posed out of bigotry which stems from hatred but quite the opposite; it is asked to screen out those who participate in high-risk sexual conduct having incidence rates of sexually transmitted diseases far above the norm. In screening out these potential donors they are seeking to protect the general population from deadly viruses and this is a logical and loving act. As the Globe & Mail editorial put it a few years back, " This question must be asked discreetly, but in the end what is more important, the feelings of the donor or the health of the recipient?" ******* Our Council has attempted on several occasions to communicate this point to the Sexual Orientation Committee only to be compared to the Klu Klux Klan. In the fall of this year the Committee moved to remove the terms 'critical thinking' and 'evidence-based teaching' from policy dealing with sexual orientation in the classrooms. The reason cited was, "The medical community has evidence which we would not want presented or discussed in the classroom." At our most recent meeting, some members said that children may hold their own faith and\or medical based view but they are not to express it on public school property, respectfully or otherwise. ******* Schools which will not permit critical thinking or evidence-based teaching are not places of learning, rather they are institutes of 'unlearning' which attempt to unlearn sensible good living behaviours instilled in the homes. These 'unlearning' classrooms are driven solely by slanted ideology and are becoming an increasingly harmful place to send our children. ******* Jim Enos, Vice-president, Hamilton-Wentworth Family Action Council ******* b 905 335 2353, h 905 304 7944 *********************************************************************************************************

Links to other sites on the Web

(A4a1e3) article: Queering the Schools
(A4a1e4) article: 'Gay' activists target studentsols
(A4a1e6) (A) home page

The following warning is a prophetic message given to me, Frank Wagner, in November of 1974. ******* LISTEN TO THE CRY OF THE ABORTED CHILDREN. THEIR CRY IS NO. THEIR CRY IS A CRY OF TERROR. HEED THEIR CRY. ******* This prophecy is now being fulfilled. ******* For details about the source, meaning and fulfillment of this prophetic message go to ******* http://ca.geocities.com/fwagner4/index.html ******* email me at *** [email protected] ***