Category Archives: Families
That crowing you hear is from the homosexual pressure groups, jubilant from their semi-capture of the Boy Scouts of America. BSA announced today that boys struggling from same-sex attraction can join scouting troops, but self-identifying homosexual adults cannot lead Boy Scout troops.
The homosexual activists have been out to conquer the Boy Scouts for decades. They’re halfway there now. But God has a way of taking of what some intend for evil and turning it around for good.
Here’s what I mean. In whose company would boys with sexual confusion most benefit?
From the Gay-Straight Alliance in their public schools? It’s a politically pressure group working from within to whip public schools into compliance with homosexual activist demands.
Or in the presence of Christian scout leaders teaching moral codes?
Same-sex attraction is extremely rare in the U.S. Only about 2 percent of the population struggles with same-sex attraction. Most Boy Scout troops probably won’t have anyone with same-sex attraction involved. There are thousands of small towns in America where boys are well-bonded with their own gender and don’t have these unfortunate struggles. So for many troops, this will be a non-issue.
Perhaps in girly-man towns like San Francisco, some troops will be entirely made up of boys with same-sex attraction. But that will be the exception to the norm.
Men and boys with healthy male identities can provide healthy role modeling for boys who are confused. And in today’s climate of moral relativism, a weekly dose of Judeo-Christian morality will be extremely valuable to boys who are struggling. And in fact, therapists who work with males going through these struggles encourage them to engage in activities with males in order to develop healthy male bonding.
Now this isn’t to say that there won’t be some problems, and that condemnation of the BSA’s foolish decision today isn’t justified. The Left is falling back on its tired and worn-out clichés again today.
Chris Wallace, of Fox News, was on the Mike Gallagher Show today, making trite, senseless, typical leftist points (remember, he is the son of Mike Wallace):
- “Times have changed.” So what. Morality has not changed, Chris.
- “Laws used to prevent inter-racial marriage.” That was about race, not gender, Chris. This argument has never worked for the Left.
- “They aren’t going to jump ‘em in the tent!”
Oh, no, Chris? There are going to be 17-year-old boys with same-sex attraction taking advantage of younger boys on camping trips. And that’s where the threat lies. These boys should not be allowed to have a free run at younger, vulnerable boys. The supervision now must be on red alert. Remember, many homosexuals were tragically molested/raped as youngsters, and they learned unhealthy sexuality as a result. What better opportunity for an older homosexual boy to take advantage of younger boys on a night in the woods? It’s the same tempation faced by many pedophiles working at Disney Land, and by many priests with access to young boys.
But the new rules being what they are … all you boys with unwanted same-sex attraction desiring a scouting life … be sure to bring your Bible to next week’s meeting. You’ll learn a lot about how to be morally straight and about God’s plan for male-female marriage. Take notes; it will do you good. And be sure to drop your membership in the GSA at your local school; it does NOT have your best interests in mind. God bless you.
From the Center for Arizona Policy:
In the current debate over whether Arizona should expand Medicaid services pursuant to the federal Affordable Care Act, questions have arisen regarding the funding of abortion providers. To clarify the misinformation surrounding this issue, Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) has provided the following analysis of the concerns raised along with our recommendation on how the Legislature might address the issue.
Medicaid Expansion Pro-Life Issues Q & A
Question: Will Medicaid expansion result in additional money and benefits for abortion providers in Arizona?
Answer: YES. There is no law currently in force to prevent abortion providers from receiving payment from AHCCCS for providing family planning or medical services other than abortion. These taxpayer dollars subsidize the abortion business by freeing up additional money to be spent on abortion services.
Additionally, an AHCCCS patient who receives family planning services from an abortion provider might not otherwise have had a relationship with an abortion provider. Once that relationship is established, the patient will be more likely to return to that abortion provider if that patient has an unexpected pregnancy.
Thus, abortion providers’ participation in Medicaid necessarily benefits them both financially and through creating a stream of patients for the abortion side of the business.
With the proposed expansion of Medicaid to cover additional childless adults, the likelihood of this “patient stream” benefit is magnified because the population being covered is the prime target of the abortion industry.
Question: But doesn’t federal law already prohibit using Medicaid to pay for abortions?
Answer: YES, but the prohibition only applies to direct funding for abortion.
Currently, because of state law and the federal Hyde amendment, Medicaid dollars cannot be used to pay directly for abortions, except under the following circumstances:
- Federal law requires AHCCCS to pay for abortions resulting from rape and incest.
- State law requires AHCCCS to pay for abortions to save the life of the mother.
- The Arizona Supreme Court decision in SIMAT requires the state to pay for “medically necessary” abortions for indigent women.
There is no evidence to date that these categories are currently being abused, but an unscrupulous abortion provider could be found stretching the definitions in an effort to receive government funding for abortions.
However, the concern is not generally these limited categories. As explained above, the concern is primarily that taxpayer dollars funding Medicaid subsidize the abortion business and provide new patients to abortion providers who participate in AHCCCS.
Question: Didn’t the Legislature address this last year through HB 2800?
Answer: YES, but that law is not currently in force.
Federal district court Judge Neil Wake issued a permanent injunction preventing the State from enforcing HB 2800 to exclude abortion providers from AHCCCS. His ruling is based on federal Medicaid statutes and rules, and the decision is currently being appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide whether to take a similar case out of Indiana.
Question: Can the Legislature do anything to address the issue?
Answer: YES, but until we receive a favorable court ruling or see Congressional action, there are only limited steps the State may take to partially restrict the benefits of Medicaid to abortion providers.
Some potential incremental options for amending Medicaid expansion include:
- Clarifying that Medicaid dollars cannot be used either directly or indirectly for performing, assisting, or encouraging abortions and requiring AHCCCS to conduct audits to ensure compliance.
- Prohibiting abortion providers from performing abortions on AHCCCS members who have come to them previously for family planning services.
- Enhancing abortion reporting requirements to include information about which abortion providers are receiving AHCCCS money.
Recommendation: Center for Arizona Policy requests that the incremental steps listed above be included in the final adoption of any Medicaid expansion measure.
The Ninth Circus strikes again — dooming more Arizona children to grisly abortion deaths.
By overturning the Mother’s Health and Safety Act (HB 2036) that prohibited most abortions after 20 weeks, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disallowed an Arizona law passed by the legislature last year.
The Center for Arizona Policy had strongly supported the bill, prompting this response by its president, Cathi Herrod:
“This ruling is not surprising nor am I discouraged at the prospects of this important law ultimately being upheld. The Ninth Circuit Court is historically one of the most overturned appellate courts in the nation. Based on the facts of this case, I am confident that this Court will be overturned once again.”
Last summer, Federal District Court Judge James Teilborg, of Phoenix, upheld the constitutionality of the law based on the significant risks that abortion presents to the health and safety of the mother and scientifically-established fact preborn children can feel pain at 20 weeks. But the Ninth Circus has an agenda to follow, and it’s anti-life and anti-family.
In Herrod’s email alert, she said:
“The Court put a pro-abortion ideology before the health and safety of women and preborn children. The Court held to the vague standard that abortions can only be limited based on whether the child is viable, even though they confessed viability is not a ‘fixed’ point. Ultimately, as we’ve anticipated from the beginning, this case should be decided by the United States Supreme Court. Sadly, until that time, women and preborn children will suffer the consequences of this disappointing decision.”
It still isn’t known if Arizona will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It could also ask the entire Ninth Circuit to hear the appeal, but the likelihood of Chief Judge Stephen Reinhardt, an 82-year-old who carries water for Planned Parenthood, grantint that is remote.
Today, OnMyHonor.Net, a coalition of concerned Boy Scouts of America (BSA) parents, scoutmasters, Eagle Scouts and other scouting leaders who affirm scouting’s timeless values, announced the Rally for Scouting, a nationwide series of rallies to support the current membership policy of the BSA to take place on Friday, May 17, 2013 from noon to 1:30 pm local time. A full list of over 40 rally locations is available at: http://www.OnMyHonor.net/map.
As delegates consider a proposed change to BSA membership standards, many people with an interest in scouting are raising concerns about the risks and effects that change would have on scouting programs. The proposed resolution, to be voted on by the national council on May 23 in Grapevine, Texas, would change the membership policy to require all chartered scouting units to allow open homosexuality among boys in the organization but not adults.
Recently, OnMyHonor.Net published an open letter providing a legal and ethical analysis of the BSA resolution, giving council members 10 reasons to vote “No” in May.
Rallies will be held today in Tucson and Phoenix:
2969 North Greenfield Road, Phoenix,
Contact: Kimberly Eliot (520) 282-0390
5049 East Broadway, Suite 200, Tucson
Contact: Roy Lamb (734) 634-2102
Read the letter
Thank you for permitting me to speak.
I am supporting this marriage amendment.
My mother was very seriously ill. From infancy I grew up with a homosexual father. I loved my Dad, but my father exposed me to diverse sexual subcultures. The gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual subcultures did not have boundaries and principles of morality and monogamy. Rather it was experimentation, pansexuality, many sexual partners, and self-indulgent lifestyles. Gender and sexual orientation were blurred. Unisex dressing, transsexualism, and transient and anonymous multiple partners were common. My father and his associates were not limited by gender nor age. They frequented public areas. By age ten, for example, I was exposed to a gay nude beach, a sex shop, and a gay cruising park. My father had partners in the home from my infancy. All our vacations were to key GLBT areas where cruising was available.
I was traumatized by six years old in my household. I was stuttering, blacking out and having nightmares caused by molestation, physical and verbal abuse, and abandonment. My father would leave us alone for days to be with his partners. At eight, two of my father’s partners committed suicide. My father intimidated me into silence, making me fearful for my life, and unable to talk about my father’s lifestyle. Alcohol, drugs, gay bars and parties were part of the scene. Youthfulness, beauty, art, fashion, and travel were prized. However, the painful losses my father’s friends experienced were devastating. My father and his partners were involved in domestic violence and he dropped them like commodities. Males who were minors were at risk in my home of being preyed upon sexually.
Dad had encouraged me to be more open sexually, while teaching me by example that sex was gratuitous. I could not look to my father as a moral agent in my life. This left me confused about my sexual identity, and my feelings and roles as a girl and woman. My father could not show affection or affirmation to females, making me believe it was better to be a boy. He doted on his male partners – time, communication, affection and sex – travelling and buying them gifts, leaving me feeling worthless. If particular judges had their way, I would have had at least three “psychological” parents – men I would not have wanted to be named my parents.
I felt worthless and began seeking other boys’ affections by age twelve. Long-term, I became depressed, anxious, and suicidal. I was in and out of counselling between the ages of sixteen and thirty. All my family members were severely impacted.
My father left his associations within the subcultures in the late eighties, succumbing to death by AIDS in 1991 at the age of fifty-one. Many of his partners have died of AIDS, some in their early forties.
Children have no voice when they grow up in a homosexual household. Children are unwillingly forced to tolerate their parent’s sexual choices and living arrangements. If I spoke about what happened around my father, I would risk being sent to the streets or a group home. I was silenced for over forty years, afraid to share the reality of what I had lived through. I waited until both my parents had died before speaking publicly. Most other adult children feel that they cannot speak about their experiences until their parents have passed away. By the way, I know of 14 children who grew up with a homosexual parent, including myself. All of us have been negatively impacted long term. This includes adult children who have not been able to cope with their difficulties growing up – Some have tried to numb the pain with drug and alcohol addictions and sexual promiscuity.
My first thirty years around my father and his partners showed me how not to live my life. Marriage exclusively between a man and a woman is the best environment for children. Children need to see gender as male or female. Children need firm moral boundaries around sexuality. As a child, I could not comprehend the emphasis on being gender-neutral, unisex dressing, and pansexual practices. Group sex, bathhouse sex, cruising, and other expressions of diverse sexuality broke down the barriers between private and public sex.
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, has stated, “Undermining the traditional definition of marriage is an assault on the beliefs of virtually all cultural and religious communities who have come to this country,” according to Lifesite News.
Freedom of speech and democracy are eroded by hate crime and same-sex marriage legislation, and by judicial activism. Human Rights Tribunals in Canada police speech, and penalize upstanding citizens for their expressed opposition to homosexuality. It takes only one complaint against a person to be brought before the tribunal, costing the person tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. On the other hand, the person making the complaint has his legal fees completely paid for by the government. Even if the defendant is found innocent, he cannot recover his legal costs. If he is found guilty, he must pay fines to the person(s) who brought forth the complaint. All television, radio and print media are monitored. May what is happening in Canada serve as a warning to Massachusetts. Where can the children find safety if legislation is in place legitimizing homosexual marriage?
Attorney General Tom Horne has issued a letter to the Bisbee City Council stating that a proposed Civil Union Ordinance, if passed, would be unconstitutional and require the attorney general’s office to initiate an action in the courts to enjoin, or stop it.All three members of the legislature representing Bisbee have expressed deep concerns about the constitutionality of the ordinance. In a statement today, Attorney General Tom Horne said: “I have today sent a letter to the Bisbee City Attorney and City Council members stating that they have no authority to pass the ordinance that they will be considering tonight. This is in response to a complaint received from all three state legislators representing Bisbee: Senator Gail Griffin, Representative David Gowan and Representative David Stevens.
The ordinance seeks to change seven separate State statutes within the boundaries of the city, dealing with issues such as community property, inheritance of property, and appointment of personal representatives. The only proper way to change a statute is through the Arizona Legislature, not through actions of the City Council attempting to change a State statute within its boundaries. I emphasize that I am not expressing any opinion on the policy of the ordinance. My job is to enforce the laws that exist and I am obligated to respond to complaints from state legislators. If the ordinance is passed, the Office will initiate a special action in the Courts to enjoin it.”
Civil unions are a radical, left-wing attempt to promote counterfeit “marriage.” They actually promote cohabitation — subjecting women and children to drastically heightened risks of violence.