Homosexuals immune to Mass. budget cuts

Homosexuals immune to Mass. budget cuts

A pro-family advocate says budget cuts are coming for Massachusetts schools, but programs aimed at promoting homosexuality need not worry.

Many states across the U.S. are facing budget deficits, and Massachusetts is not immune. Governor Deval Patrick and state lawmakers have already slashed millions from the budget, but more cuts are on the way.

Brian Camenker of MassResistance says more than 1,000 state jobs as well as public school funding have been cut, while mental health facilities have also been closed. However, pro-homosexual programs in Massachusetts’ public schools have remained.

more…

Perversion reigns supreme in liberalism :mad:

What, precisely, are these programs identified as “pro-homosexual”? I can’t find a list of what they are in the article.

That is because the “news source” is an arm of the American Family Association, a right wing pressure group. The article is just propaganda. They seem to base their article on Brian Camenker of MassResistance, an organization which has been identified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

This was found through the various links, specificlly from Mass Resistance.

mass.gov/cgly/08annrept.pdf

While it does not go into detail, further, in depth research will describe what they are doing in schools. We know what they do in schools, this is no new secret. And the government is funding it, also not new.

All this gay stuff in schools, is designed to brainwash kids into accepting gays.

Its nice not to need any evidence to back things up, right? Looking through that article, I see a lot of things about getting better information on demographics, reducing bullying, reducing homelessness, and keeping gay teenagers out of bars where they can run into serious trouble. I don’t see a lot of stuff worth objecting to.

Again, I think that if anybody is going to make the claim that X amount of money is going to “pro-homosexual organizations and programs”, they should be able to come up with a list of where the money is going. After all, budgets are public (in New Jersey, they are, at least). It shouldn’t take too much work for MassResistance or whatever they call themselves to find this information.

Lujack;

Its nice not to need any evidence to back things up, right?

I don’t know, I know what that article is referring to. If you frequent the AFA, you probably know to. And again,

Looking through that article, I see a lot of things about getting better information on demographics, reducing bullying, reducing homelessness, and keeping gay teenagers out of bars where they can run into serious trouble. I don’t see a lot of stuff worth objecting to.

But isn’t that stuff that can apply to all kids? Why spend taxpayer money on stuff only directed at gays? How does gay homlessness and bars apply to first graders? And again, much of this is about getting kids to accept gays, which in turn, will accept their behavior as normal.

Again, I think that if anybody is going to make the claim that X amount of money is going to “pro-homosexual organizations and programs”, they should be able to come up with a list of where the money is going.

Well, I do agree here to a point. What the article said is true, though not “backed up” in the article.

I don’t frequent the AFA, but I do spend a lot of time around schools. I went to a Catholic school for high school, but both my parents teach in public ones, and I spent grammar school in a public school as well. I just don’t see it hapening.

But isn’t that stuff that can apply to all kids? Why spend taxpayer money on stuff only directed at gays? How does gay homlessness and bars apply to first graders? And again, much of this is about getting kids to accept gays, which in turn, will accept their behavior as normal.

Well, some stuff does need to be directed. For example, the document put up mentioned they need better demographic information. That isn’t stuff they can just get with a regular survey. It also mentioned particular problems that need to be specifically dealt with. For example, a normal anti-bullying initiative can’t effectively deal with how ingrained the phrases “That’s so gay” or “Don’t be a f____”, or “She’s a d___” have been. That stuff is worth targeted initiatives.

I’m not sure what you mean with gay homelessness and bars applying to first graders. It doesn’t, but that document was from an organization that works K-12. Naturally, that would be focused on high schools.

I think, though, that sometimes zealousness to protect Catholic teaching leads people to get tangled up opposing measures that actually support Catholic teaching. Hate towards and bullying of gays is never acceptable, and the Church makes that pretty clear. It is a real problem in schools, and I don’t think money and effort being spent towards it is wasted.

Well, I do agree here to a point. What the article said is true, though not “backed up” in the article.

That’s a problem with the article, though. You might know that its true; you might even have seen a convincing study that proves it. But when someone less informed or with a different opinion sees the article, they see no evidence, which makes it easy to assume they’re either making stuff up or broadly labeling programs as “pro-homosexual” that really aren’t.

A gay student should not expect any less than the other kids. Taxpayer money is spent on a variety of matters, and is also directed at gays.

Lujack;

I don’t frequent the AFA, but I do spend a lot of time around schools. I went to a Catholic school for high school, but both my parents teach in public ones, and I spent grammar school in a public school as well. I just don’t see it hapening.

That does not mean that it is not happening:

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=It’s%20Elementary&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#

massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html

cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=448&department=CFI&categoryid=cfreport

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_&_King

courtingequality.com/archives/71

massnews.com/2003_Editions/4_April/041703_mn_teaching_kindergarten_kids_human_differences_in_newton.shtml

**"Her session at Fistgate 2003 was about introducing six-year-olds to homosexual concepts. She shared books and sample lesson plans. The session was titled, “Developing Lessons that Help Young Students Understand Human Differences.”

“What I do is to go into classrooms and teach kids about respect for human differences and to teach social skills lessons,” she said, adding, “I have been asked to train new teachers in how to do some of these lessons. The new teachers are being trained to do this.”**

Well, some stuff does need to be directed. For example, the document put up mentioned they need better demographic information. That isn’t stuff they can just get with a regular survey. It also mentioned particular problems that need to be specifically dealt with. For example, a normal anti-bullying initiative can’t effectively deal with how ingrained the phrases “That’s so gay” or “Don’t be a f____”, or “She’s a d___” have been. That stuff is worth targeted initiatives.

Yeah, but that is not the job of the schools.

I’m not sure what you mean with gay homelessness and bars applying to first graders. It doesn’t, but that document was from an organization that works K-12. Naturally, that would be focused on high schools.

Well because that teaching does not belong in schools no matter which grade it is.

I think, though, that sometimes zealousness to protect Catholic teaching leads people to get tangled up opposing measures that actually support Catholic teaching. Hate towards and bullying of gays is never acceptable, and the Church makes that pretty clear. It is a real problem in schools, and I don’t think money and effort being spent towards it is wasted.

But 1) this leads to and is the acceptance agenda. 2) This acceptance will lead to gay marriage, do you support that? That is not Catholic teachings. None of this is the job of the schools, it is the job of the parents.

That’s a problem with the article, though. You might know that its true; you might even have seen a convincing study that proves it. But when someone less informed or with a different opinion sees the article, they see no evidence, which makes it easy to assume they’re either making stuff up or broadly labeling programs as “pro-homosexual” that really aren’t.

Or they assume that it is true. But I understand your point, and I, myself, would have backed up my claims had I been the author.

cristininha;

A gay student should not expect any less than the other kids.

And they are not getting any less than other kids. If anything, they are having the majority revolve around them, or at least trying to have it that way.

Taxpayer money is spent on a variety of matters, and is also directed at gays.

Sure, and as a conservative, I also have an issue with taxes and how/where/how much taxes are being spent. The answer is not to aim it directly at people, but to cut the taxes. It is hardly fair for the government to spend taxes on specific groups of people. Taxes should be spent on things that apply to ALL people, general stuff. All people need the roads plowed, not just gays and not just whites and not just someone with a tattoo.

Well, if part of the job of the school is to prevent bullying from taking place in its hallways, then that most certainly is part of the job of the schools.

If preventing bullying from taking place isn’t the job of the schools, whose job is it?

Well because that teaching does not belong in schools no matter which grade it is.

Then where does it belong? Somebody has to take care of those kids.

But 1) this leads to and is the acceptance agenda. 2) This acceptance will lead to gay marriage, do you support that? That is not Catholic teachings. None of this is the job of the schools, it is the job of the parents.

And if the parents aren’t doing the job, then what does the school do? Say “The hell with it, it isn’t our problem”, or try and stop bullying from happening?

Besides, Catholic teaching also says we can’t commit evil to prevent evil. Bullying is an evil, and we can’t allow it to continue to exist in order to try and prevent gay marriage.

Or they assume that it is true. But I understand your point, and I, myself, would have backed up my claims had I been the author.

Okay.

Lujack;

Well, if part of the job of the school is to prevent bullying from taking place in its hallways, then that most certainly is part of the job of the schools.

If preventing bullying from taking place isn’t the job of the schools, whose job is it?

Then where does it belong? Somebody has to take care of those kids.

And if the parents aren’t doing the job, then what does the school do? Say “The hell with it, it isn’t our problem”, or try and stop bullying from happening?

Stopping a fight or bullying can be done without bringing in gay advocacy groups to preach to kids. The school can stop the bullying, and that is it.

Besides, Catholic teaching also says we can’t commit evil to prevent evil. Bullying is an evil, and we can’t allow it to continue to exist in order to try and prevent gay marriage.

An we can with 1000% certainty, prepare to welcome gay marraige into our society.

I think we can find a way to reconcile the rights of homosexuals with christianity.

Yes, and they can do this by bringing in people who have researched the subject. I’ll use this as an example:

My high school had an anti-bullying speaker who gave a forty-five minute presentation, going through five different scenarios of bullying, ranging from athletes on non-athletes to racial bullying and including in which the bully targeted gays (he was actually a terrific speaker, one of the best I’ve ever seen). Both the document posted earlier and MassResistance would identify that as a “gay advocacy group” and cite the cost of the speaker as money spent to either promote the gay agenda or to prevent bullying, depending whose writing the list.

Do you have a problem with this sort of speaker? I would hazard a guess that most of the money listed in MassResistance’s article is going to programs like that, which have a short bit on the unique problems of anti-gay bullying. That’s why I was little bit suspicious of the article; its very easy to rig the numbers like that.

It is worth noting, too, that stopping anti-gay bullying has its own unique problems. Like I said, people toss out “That’s so gay” and “f____” or “d____” without thinking. That isn’t a problem faced by normal anti-bullying initiatives.

An we can with 1000% certainty, prepare to welcome gay marraige into our society.

So you believe that if we fight this fight following Catholic teaching, we’ll lose? Interesting.

Have you ever been a public school student in the 2000’s? I lived through 4 years of that hell (in six different parts of the country nonetheless), and daily in all six schools I heard blatant homophobic remarks, with teachers looking on and saying nothing. This isn’t quite the majority revolution that you claim exists.

The point is, gay children of all ages are exploited in the supposedly “safe” environment of their schools at a much higher rate than straight teens. Therefore it is the duty of the school system to offer additional services to gay kids, just like they would do for any other risk group.

Lujack;4648992]

Do you have a problem with this sort of speaker?

I do actually. Let the Church teach that or some after school activity, but it does not belong in classes. School is not suppose to be in the business of social engineering. Their job is to get kids ready for the world in a general way.

I would hazard a guess that most of the money listed in MassResistance’s article is going to programs like that, which have a short bit on the unique problems of anti-gay bullying. That’s why I was little bit suspicious of the article; its very easy to rig the numbers like that.

But look at the other articles. They are all intertwined in one way or another. All meant to tell the majority how to treat a minority. Which by itself is fine, just keep it out of schools.

It is worth noting, too, that stopping anti-gay bullying has its own unique problems. Like I said, people toss out “That’s so gay” and “f____” or “d____” without thinking. That isn’t a problem faced by normal anti-bullying initiatives.

Can you elaborate a little on this please?

So you believe that if we fight this fight following Catholic teaching, we’ll lose? Interesting.

Well not “lose”, but we will end up enabeling gay marriage to happen because many are taking Catholic teaching to mean we must become all encompassing bleedinghearts who must accept everyone and hate the sin. Ok fine.
But is also a form of human weakness. The more acceptable things are, the more people get used to it. The more used to it they become, the less damaging the outcome seems. 60 years ago, gays were in the closet. Today, they are out and open everywhere, they even have their own TV shows, which teaches kids and people that that behavior is acceptable, even funny.

Ultimately, gay marriage does not seem so sinful to people anymore.

And when that’s not happening in church or at home, then what?

But look at the other articles. They are all intertwined in one way or another. All meant to tell the majority how to treat a minority. Which by itself is fine, just keep it out of schools.

But if it needs to be done, how do you reach kids?

Can you elaborate a little on this please?

A normal anti-bullying initiative just has to tell people not to bully, but an initiative focused on ending bullying towards gays has to explain why those phrases are not good things to say, and how they can be hurtful. More work has to be done than a skit that basically says not to pick on the nerds.

Well not “lose”, but we will end up enabeling gay marriage to happen because many are taking Catholic teaching to mean we must become all encompassing bleedinghearts who must accept everyone and hate the sin. Ok fine.
But is also a form of human weakness. The more acceptable things are, the more people get used to it. The more used to it they become, the less damaging the outcome seems. 60 years ago, gays were in the closet. Today, they are out and open everywhere, they even have their own TV shows, which teaches kids and people that that behavior is acceptable, even funny.

Ultimately, gay marriage does not seem so sinful to people anymore.

Do you feel they should all be in the closet?

v3orb;

Have you ever been a public school student in the 2000’s? I lived through 4 years of that hell (in six different parts of the country nonetheless), and daily in all six schools I heard blatant homophobic remarks, with teachers looking on and saying nothing. This isn’t quite the majority revolution that you claim exists.

I never said it was a majority revolution. Not one single time. I said that it happens.

The point is, gay children of all ages are exploited in the supposedly “safe” environment of their schools at a much higher rate than straight teens. Therefore it is the duty of the school system to offer additional services to gay kids, just like they would do for any other risk group.

It is the duty of schools to stop any fights, take charge of the students, control them, and teach. Not to have “speakers” come in and teach the acceptance, through indoctrination, of gay’s. They call it bullying, but the aim is ultimately to have kids accept homosexuality. Otherwise, how did we manage to survive all this time without some “speaker” to tell our kids how to behave. That is not their job, it is the job of the parents.

I think the best way to look at this would be to look at a person with same sex attraction as Mother Teresa would - with love and compassion.

The church has no problem with the souls of any human being. The question is not whether or not a person has same sex attraction. The sins of adultery and pre-marital sex are no less serious than homosexual behavior and for the same reasons.

If we are to judge homosexual acts with greater condemnation than that of a hetersexual engaging in adultery or premarital sex we have missed the whole point.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.