. the homosexual agenda is really about the 3 Ps: prostitution, pedophilia, and polygamy.
Dear Mr. Lincoln:
We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!
In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week. We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the 'tea party movement'.
The tea party position to "end the bailouts" for example is just silly. Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn't that what we want all Coloreds to strive for? What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us coloreds! Of course, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.
And the ridiculous idea of "reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government." What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life? As Coloreds we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions!
The racist tea parties also demand that the government "stop the out of control spending." Again, they directly target coloreds. That means we Coloreds would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.
Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government "stop raising our taxes." That is outrageous! How will we coloreds ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-coloreds get to keep what they earn? Totally racist! The tea party expects coloreds to be productive members of society?
Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house. Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we belong.
Sincerely
Precious Ben Jealous, Tom's Nephew NAACP Head Colored Person
A proposed sex-education curriculum in Montana is drawing outrage because it would teach young children about subjects like same-sex intercourse.
Under the proposal for the Helena school district, kindergartners would learn the proper names of sexual body parts, first-graders would be taught that sexual relations could happen between two men or two women, and fifth-graders would learn the various ways people can have intercourse.
Jeff Laszloffy, president of the Montana Family Foundation (MFF), contends that the proposal "tramples" on parental rights. "It places government squarely between parents and their children," he claims, "and the outrage that we're seeing in Helena, we understand well, because in Montana we understand what happens when you get between a mother grizzly and her cubs."
He relates that reaction to the "level of outrage that we're seeing from these parents that feel like their children are being indoctrinated rather than educated."
Bruce Messinger, Helena's school superintendent, said the guide was drawn up by a committee that included parents, teachers and administrators. That committee used local practices and examined national guidelines, including those put out by the American Academy of Pediatrics, he said.
Cathy Areu, publisher of the Latina women's magazine Catalina and a former high school teacher, told HLN the standards sound defensible and age-appropriate.
"It sounds like they are teaching body parts and things that are facts of life," Areu said. "I feel more comfortable with my daughter learning about this in a classroom than from a boy in the hallway."
The proposed curriculum guide is part of a broad range of health courses that also teach nutriition, disease prevention, anatomy and environmental health. It would teach students as early as second grade that using anti-gay slurs is hurtful and teach children in older elementary grades about sexual harassment and abuse.
Students would be told as early as kindergarten to properly name body parts. The concept that people "can love people of the same gender and people of another gender" would be introduced in first grade, though homosexual relationships aren't discussed until fifth grade.
Fifth-graders also would learn that sexual intercourse "includes but is not limited to vaginal, oral, or anal penetration." Teachers would start discussing pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and drugs and alcohol with middle-schoolers, while high school students would learn about sexual orientation and the "legal implications" of some decisions.
“The Huffington Post on Wednesday falsely attributed statements to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) about discrimination faced by gays and lesbians. The statements were apparently posted by an unnamed “administrator” of the “Protect Marriage: 1 Man 1 Woman” Facebook account. Huffington Post falsely claims that this is NOM’s Facebook page. The Facebook account on which these statements were reportedly made is not NOM’s Facebook page and neither NOM nor anyone representing NOM made these statements. The Facebook account in question is operated by a private party and NOM does not control what is allowed to be posted on the account, a fact that could have been easily known to Huffington Post had they reached out to NOM to verify the report.”
Argentina legalized same-sex marriage Thursday, becoming the first country in Latin America to grant gays and lesbians all the legal rights, responsibilities and protections that marriage brings to heterosexual couples.
After a marathon debate, 33 lawmakers voted in favor, 27 were against it and 3 abstained in Argentina's Senate in a vote that ended after 4 a.m. Since the lower house already approved it, and President Cristina Fernandez is a strong supporter, it now becomes law as soon as it is published in the official bulletin.
The law is sure to bring a wave of marriages by gays and lesbians who have increasingly found Buenos Aires to be more accepting than many other places in the region.
The approval came despite a concerted campaign by the Roman Catholic Church and evangelical groups, which drew 60,000 people to march on Congress and urged parents in churches and schools to work against passage.
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio said "everyone loses" with gay marriage, and "children need to have the right to be raised and educated by a father and a mother."
Nine gay couples had already married in Argentina after persuading judges that the constitutional mandate of equality supports their marriage rights, but some of these marriages were later declared invalid.
. . . there is a lot of gay pornography used in same-sex relationships and children are at high risk of being exposed to this within the home and the subcultures where parents and partners are affiliated. Based on ample research (...) I believe there is a higher risk of sexual abuse for children raised connected to the GLBT subcultures."
Editor's note - Stefanowicz does not provide this research.
. . . the GLBT subcultures do not look at marriage in the same way. Marriage has always been considered a traditional, man-woman institution which upholds monogamy for the benefit of children and society. The GLBT subcultures have a much broader understanding of sexual relationships and do not like restrictive boundaries which limit number of sexual partners, diverse sexualities, gender identities, roles, and expressions.
. . . When same-sex marriage is legalized, this action permanently redefines not only marriage, but also spouse, gender, parent, and family. Same-sex marriage automatically replaces natural parent with legal parent, allowing the state to usurp parental rights at anytime. Consequently, all biological natural parents are diminished to just legal parents, having the same parental rights as same-sex parent's partners who have no biological tie to the child(ren). Parenting is reduced to a legal status only, involving care giving duties, legal responsibilities, and, progressively invasive state laws. I don't think many Argentinean parents will be particularly thrilled with their permanent loss of natural parent status.
(Gays and lesbians) are not being repressed, discriminated against. There is no and never has ever been a homosexual man hunt for them. Jews, Christians, and Blacks were hunted down and murdered. Homosexuals have nothing in common with the three.
Are they completely delusional?
Dear Alvin,
If there was ever proof that the Obama Administration has gone off the rails, it's Amtrak. For the first time in the train service's history, Amtrak has decided to spend a quarter-million dollars recruiting homosexual passengers. As you may know, Amtrak isn't a private business. This is a government-run business, meaning that this $250,000 is taken directly from taxpayers' pockets. In a very real sense, this ad campaign is a federal endorsement of homosexual behavior -- one of the most serious public health threats in America. Using taxpayer funds to promote this ad campaign is insulting to the millions of Americans who have deeply-held moral convictions against homosexuality. Yet Washington is targeting the demographically small homosexual population-probably because marketing surveys suggest it is also one of the richest. So let's be honest. This Administration is more interested in riding the gravy train than getting the culture back on track.
Please contact senior officials at Amtrak and ask them to stop this campaign using your tax dollars!
For the first time, Amtrak is courting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered travelers with a targeted $250,000 multimedia advertising blitz this summer.
The government-owned rail company is looking to the LGBT community for business with the hopes that its propensity for travel will translate well into rail transportation.
While Amtrak spokeswoman, Karina Romero did not go into specifics, she told The Daily Caller, “We are always looking for new ways to reach potential passengers and this community travels a lot.”
Darlene Abubakar, the director of national advertising for Amtrak, told TheDC, “Most all of the major airlines, hotels and others in the travel and tourism industry target the LGBT market segment … Amtrak ’s goal is to raise the level of awareness of the benefits of train travel and increase consideration and ridership amongst this segment.”
. . . Amtrak has targeted other demographic groups in the past, including students, seniors, veterans, families with children, Hispanics, African Americans and international customers. However this is the first time it has aimed its efforts toward the LGBT community. Romero told TheDC that Amtrak advertisements would be featured in television and publications specifically geared toward the LGBT population.
On June 21st, Slate published a story titled "Inferior Blood" that asked, "If it's OK to reject blood from gay men, what about blacks?" Federal guidelines ban gay males from donating blood if they have had sex with men in the past 30 years, because they are classified as a group with an increased risk for HIV. But the article notes that since HIV prevalence is 18 times higher for Black woman than their white counterparts, why not ban Black folks from donating blood too?
The next day on ABC's The View, D.L. Hughley, a Black actor and comedian, presented his wildly misinformed opinion as a fact: "When you look at the prevalence of HIV in the African-American community, it's primarily young women getting it from men on the 'down low.' " That's simply not true.
Despite years of speculation about so-called "down low" men--or, Black men who sleep with men while identifying as straight and having sex with women, too--the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found no evidence that they are responsible for high HIV rates among Black women. In fact, CDC studies have found men fitting the "down low" description are actually no more likely to have unprotected sex than their peers. Nonetheless, thanks to folks like Hughley, the "down low" meme lives on. Meanwhile, the far less sexy factors that appear to play large roles in HIV rates among Black women--such as poor access to routine STD screening and treatment or histories of sexual abuse--get ignored.
Yesterday, in a full-page ad running in Variety Magazine, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the Black AIDS Institute and the National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC) called on ABC and The View to correct misinformation put forth on the the show.
How does he sleep at night, what position does he sleep in? Does he sleep like a woman, or like a man? What does he talk about in his sleep?
You can touch his rectum to see if he has those tell-tale humpson his anus from having it stretched open with a penis. Then later on ask him if he's ever had hemorrhoids really bad.
If he asks you to "toss his salad" and you agree, and his legs go up too quickly, he's probably used to doing it.
A Nevada public health organization has cut ties with the Las Vegas church that counts controversial Ugandan anti-gay pastor Martin Ssempa as a mission partner.
As Salon reported on July 2, the Canyon Ridge Community Church has an ongoing relationship with Ssempa, who has become the public face of Uganda's "kill the gays bill." At the same time, the church has been working with the Southern Nevada Health District in Las Vegas to provide a location for HIV testing and AIDS awareness activities. But late Friday, in a letter to Canyon Ridge pastor Kevin Odor, the agency's chief health officer, Lawrence Sands, severed the relationship, citing the church's support for Ssempa.
Dr. Sands stated that "Pastor Ssempa's support of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, which would criminally penalize homosexuals, is in direct conflict with the overarching public health goals of the health district."
As written, the Anti-Homosexuality Bill would impose the death penalty on HIV-positive people caught in homosexual intimacy. Non-HIV positive gays could get life in prison. In Uganda, support for the bill is driven by a coalition of Muslim and evangelical clergy, with Martin Ssempa leading the charge via local demonstrations and the international media. Despite Ssempa's vocal promotion of the bill, Canyon Ridge Christian Church has stuck by him, declining to condemn his harsh anti-gay rhetoric or the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.
In the past, Southern Nevada partnered with Canyon Ridge church to offer HIV testing on site, most recently on June 27, the National HIV Testing Day. Calling it "unfortunate that we will be unable to continue to work together as community partners," Sands said the action was necessary to remain consistent with basic principles of public health practice.
An adjunct professor who taught courses on Catholicism at the University of Illinois has lost his teaching job there, and he claims it is a violation of his academic freedom.
Kenneth Howell was told after the spring semester ended that he would no longer be teaching in the UI's Department of Religion. The decision came after a student complained about a discussion of homosexuality in the class in which Howell taught that the Catholic Church believes homosexual acts are morally wrong.
Howell has been an adjunct lecturer in the department for nine years, during which he taught two courses, Introduction to Catholicism and Modern Catholic Thought. He was also director of the Institute of Catholic Thought, part of St. John's Catholic Newman Center on campus and the Catholic Diocese of Peoria. Funding for his salary came from the Institute of Catholic Thought.
One of his lectures in the introductory class on Catholicism focuses on the application of natural law theory to a social issue. In early May, Howell wrote a lengthy e-mail to his students, in preparation for an exam, in which he discusses how the theory of utilitarianism and natural law theory would judge the morality of homosexual acts.
"Natural Moral Law says that Morality must be a response to REALITY," he wrote in the e-mail, obtained by The News-Gazette. "In other words, sexual acts are only appropriate for people who are complementary, not the same."
He went on to write there has been a disassociation of sexual activity from morality and procreation, in contradiction of Natural Moral Theory.
The student complaint came in a May 13 e-mail to Robert McKim, head of the religion department. The author of the e-mail said he was writing on behalf of a friend – a student in Howell's class, who wanted to remain anonymous. The e-mail complained about Howell's statements about homosexuality, which the student called "hate speech.
One example applicable to homosexual acts illustrates the problem. To the best of my knowledge, in a sexual relationship between two men, one of them tends to act as the "woman" while the other acts as the "man." In this scenario, homosexual men have been known to engage in certain types of actions for which their bodies are not fitted. I don't want to be too graphic so I won't go into details but a physician has told me that these acts are deleterious to the health of one or possibly both of the men. Yet, if the morality of the act is judged only by mutual consent, then there are clearly homosexual acts which are injurious to their health but which are consented to. Why are they injurious? Because they violate the meaning, structure, and (sometimes) health of the human body.
"It's important to understand that the Log Cabin Republicans aren't really a Republican group; they're a group of homosexual activists who are inside the Republican Party, trying to neutralize the party on the issue of homosexual activism," he explains. "It's sort of a voluntary disarmament that they're advising the Republicans to undertake."
He thinks it is clear that lifting the ban on homosexual service would be extremely detrimental to America's armed forces.
"This would destroy the volunteer military as we know it, because 25 percent of people in the military have said they'll either resign or they wouldn't re-enlist," Knight reports. "It would hurt recruitment because the military draws from traditional populations that have very traditional values. It would hurt unit cohesion."
A reader who is in a position to know told me that the "last survey among military folks [revealed] that 25 percent won't re-up if this happens. This means that to allow [the] 2 percent of those out there who choose this lifestyle into the military, we'd lose 25 percent of the experienced military folks who have morals."
American scientists are touting a major stride toward a vaccine that can ward off HIV, after finding two key proteins that neutralize 91 percent of the virus' 190 strains.
The team of researchers with the National Institutes of Health's Vaccine Research Center hopes the antibody discovery can spur successful work toward a method of preventing HIV, which already afflicts an estimated 33 million people worldwide.
The discovery, published in this week's Science, is courtesy of Donor 45, an unidentified African-American man whose body produced the antibodies, called VRC01 and VRC02.
Scientists have already identified the 12 cells in his body that produced the proteins. If they can harness the mechanisms by which the antibodies were made, they might be able to create a vaccine that would spur anybody's body to make the HIV destroyers.
"We're going to be at this for a while," Gary Nabel, director of the center and a leader on this research, told The Wall Street Journal.
The last few years has seen a flurry of effort -- much of it futile -- toward creating a vaccine for HIV, much like those that helped eradicate small pox and polio. Until now, however, single antibodies only appeared to block one or two HIV strains.
Trials on the first promising vaccine, AIDSVAX, were largely a disappointment. In American and Thai trials, the vaccine yielded success rates that varied from statistically insignificant to 30 percent.
In this case, researchers seem to have found a sweet spot on the surface of the human immunodeficiency virus.
"The antibodies attach to a virtually unchanging part of the virus, and this explains why they can neutralize such an extraordinary range of HIV strains," Dr. John Mascola, one of the study's researchers, said in a statement.
Turning these newly discovered antibodies into a useful HIV vaccine remains a tall order. Scientists would need to isolate the specific part of the virus that the antibodies latch onto, then craft a vaccine using that viral snippet to train the body to produce VRC01 and VRC02.
