While the plaintiff case may be of limited concern to some parties...

- the substance of the Brief and its well researched case law on 'First Amendment / Limited Public Form Law' may be of even greater interest to MRAs seeking to know the rules for participation and non-participation.

I recommend the download of the brief to all seeking greater understanding of Free Speech law.
Ohso.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Liberty Counsel Files Amicus Brief at Supreme Court in Christian Legal Society v Martinez

www.LC.org

Washington, DC – Liberty Counsel has filed an amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a law school student group of the Christian Legal Society (“CLS”). The CLS group naturally requires voting members and officers to uphold basic Christian principles and thus was denied the same student funds allowed to all other student groups at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, a public law school in San Francisco.

When a school provides equal access to everyone except a Christian group, it is discrimination plain and simple. Liberty Counsel has filed the amicus brief on behalf of Child Evangelism Fellowship and Lamb’s Chapel, both of which won ground-breaking equal access cases before the United States Supreme Court.
If the Supreme Court sides with Hastings College of Law, then equal access under the First Amendment will be set back.

In 2004 the Christian Legal Society required voting members to sign a statement committing to orthodox Christian beliefs and disallowing a student to vote if he or she “advocates or unrepentantly engages in sexual conduct outside of marriage between a man and a woman.” The school refused to even recognize the group, claiming that its membership requirements violated the school’s policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The Christian Legal Society then filed suit. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the law school.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 in Good News Club v. Milford Central School that whenever the government establishes a “limited public forum,” it may not discriminate against speech because of its Christian viewpoint.
Liberty Counsel’s brief focuses on Good News Club and how the Ninth Circuit’s ruling will adversely affect the equal access rights granted to religious groups in Good News Club.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: “Of all places, you would expect a law school to respect the robust freedom of the First Amendment.

But, political correctness often blinds even the best from the clear commands and protections of the Constitution. A public law school cannot give the boot to a Christian group simply because its views do not conform to the school’s discriminatory policies.”

Voters See Media As Liberal, Biased, Too Powerful - Rasmussen Reports:
By: Rich Noyes January 15, 2010 (www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100115034154.aspx)

A new survey from Scott Rasmussen finds that more than half of all voters (51%) believe "the average reporter is more liberal than they are," and two-thirds (67%) think the media have "too much power and influence over government decisions."

Rasmussen's poll was released Thursday. Perhaps proving the point, on Friday, MSNBC anchor Savannah Guthrie reacted to polls showing the Democrats losing ground in Massachusetts by exclaiming: "This is bad."
According to Rasmussen:
"Only 20% of all voters say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of a political campaign.
Seventy-two percent (72%) say most reporters try to help the candidate they want to win."

Man's Best Bud- Light... Its got a bark and a bite.

For those furriners what is clueless about amerikan 'football' (often seeking to confuse it with my chosen youth sport of soccer) or who are just plain sane enough to stay away from it...Beware!

The Super Duper Bowl is about to begin! This is not the same as the football game itself, but rather what has become an entire national kultural tradition of acting out a tawdry hollyweird fantasy orgy of seriously bad taste on an 'made for TV' epic scale... Ahem.

The range of sleazy 'carney' quality shill acts extends from weeks of intense media over hype to the point of anointing 20 something millionaire defensive backs with quasi-deified status and powers;

To some of the most utterly tacky displays of gross commercialism ever devised by an advertising industry willing to glue a flaming logo on a short hair puppy, for a price.

My favorite is still the ["Bud Light" (tm).)] Beer Commercial

( http://www.metacafe.com/watch/145511...owl_commercial)

where the loyal dog is trained to attack other men in the genitals in order to garner free beer for his 'best bud'.

Of course the media hoopla that year was focused on a certain detachable wardrobe 'function' that 'shocked amerika' - at least according to our bought and paid for 'free press'...

Quite Unlike the attention they paid to the 'funny' commercial of the guy getting his genitals mauled by an animal, which is pretty much in tune with the hollyweird media Misandry Industry anyway.

Ohso
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell

Women and the Feminist Majority (Capitol Resource Institute, CA)

Tebow is scheduled to appear Superbowl television commercial that communicates a prolife message. Although no outsiders haveseen the commercial, it is said to feature the story of Pam Tebow who became ill while pregnant with her fifth son during a mission in the Philippines. Ignoring doctors suggestions to abort the child, she gave birth to Tim who went on to become the celebrated Florida Gators quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner.

Feminist groups are up-in-arms about the supposed prolife content of the ad, and have attempted to warn CBS away from airing the commercial by arguing that it "will damage its reputation, alienate viewers, and discourage consumers from supporting its shows and advertisers. "We think it's fantastic that Tim Tebow is standing up for what he believes," says Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute. "He has long been recognized as a hero on the football field, and now he's demonstrating that he's one off the field also. He must get that heroism from his mother who chose life!"

The commercial will air during the Superbowl, and is sponsored by Focus on the Family.

Facebook users can support Tim Tebow's efforts by becoming a Fan of Support Tebow's Ad on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#/TebowSuperBowlAd?ref=mf.

Additionally, a Catholic advocacy group, Catholic Families for America (CFA), announced the a nationwide petition drive in support of CBS' decision to air the pro-life advertisement. The petition can be accessed at www.ipetitions.com/petition/prolifead.

Pastor comments on his 'hate crimes' lawsuitBill Bumpas - OneNewsNow - 2/8/2010






Pastor Levon Yuille of The Bible Church, outside Detroit, Michigan, joined three other ministry leaders in filing a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. They are concerned, among other things, that under the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, those who speak out against homosexuality could be prosecuted.

Yuille tells OneNewsNow that he also finds it insulting to equate the supposed "civil rights" struggle of homosexuals with the real civil rights struggle of African-Americans.

"I feel like individuals [are] demeaning the black community in trying to equate us to what someone chooses to do sexually," Yiulle remarks..

How much you want to bet if some one tried to put a law suit on the femanazis for hate speach they would be laughed out of court, but then who knows it could be an acid test for this hate crimes law

Canadian Human Rights Commission Appeals Ruling against Hate Messages Statute

By Patrick B. Craine February 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) is appealing the September decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that determined the hate messages provision (section 13) of the Canadian Human Rights Act is unconstitutional.

In a factum filed with the Federal Court last month, the CHRC argues that then-Tribunal chairman Athanasios D. Hadjis exceeded his authority and erred in law when he ruled on September 2nd that section 13, as it stands now in conjunction with the 1998 penal provisions, violates the Charter-guaranteed freedom of expression.

Hadjis' decision came in the case of Lemire v. Warman. Marc Lemire, who runs FreedomSite.org, faced a complaint from serial complainant and former CHRC employee Richard Warman in November 2003. Warman alleged that certain postings to Lemire's website were likely to incite hatred or contempt against homosexuals and blacks, thus violating section 13.

When the Supreme Court upheld the section in 1990, Hadjis wrote, their decision was based "on the belief that the process itself was not only structured, but actually functioned in as conciliatory a manner as possible." The Supreme Court's decision, he maintained, “hinged on the absence of any penal provision akin to the one now found at s. 54(1)(c)," which is the clause that allows the Tribunal to impose fines of up to $10,000.

Margot Blight, writing the factum on behalf of the CHRC, argues that, whether the CHRC's actions are conciliatory or not, those actions cannot themselves make the statute unconstitutional. “Any question as to whether the Commission's process is sufficiently conciliatory to meet the requirements of the Charter is outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction,” she wrote.

According to Blight, the penalty clauses are not intrinsic to section 13, and thus “the appropriate remedy would have been to sever and refuse to apply [them],” rather than judging section 13 unconstitutional.

Section 13 has garnered growing criticism as an infringement on freedom of speech, particularly following several high profile cases, including those brought against publisher Ezra Levant and columnist Mark Steyn.

Steyn hailed Hadjis' ruling as a "landmark decision." "This is the beginning of the end for Section 13 and its provincial equivalents, and a major defeat for Canada's thought police," he wrote on the day of the ruling. "It's not just a personal triumph for Marc Lemire, but a critical victory in the campaign by Ezra Levant, Maclean's, yours truly and others to rid the Canadian state of this hideous affront to justice."

Lemire told LifeSiteNews that he is pleased the case will now head to Federal Court because that court is capable of overturning section 13. As the Tribunal does not have that ability, in Lemire's case, Hadjis simply chose not to apply the statute.

“If the Federal Court agrees with the [Tribunal] that section 13 is an infringement on freedom of speech, and is unconstitutional, that will stop the [CHRC] from being able to enforce section 13 and harassing other internet posters and news magazines,” said Lemire.

Lemire's lawyers will be filing a factum with the court next week, he said, and a hearing is expected by the fall. He said that they will be countering the CHRC's claim that Hadjis overstepped his authority, as well as offering further arguments in favour of overturning section 13.

“Restricting this type of speech is wrong and shouldn't be taking place in Canada,” he said.


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Section 13 Hate Message Clause Unconstitutional Rules Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

U.K.’s Conservative Leader Pledges Full Support for Gay Agenda
Agrees that the "right of gay children to have a safe education trumps the right of faith schools to teach that homosexuality is a sin."

By Hilary White LONDON, February 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – David Cameron, the heir-presumptive of Prime Minister Gordon Brown, has told a homosexual magazine to expect a “gay-friendly” future Conservative government. Cameron, who has packaged himself the “heir to Blair,” also told Attitude magazine that the Church of England should change its policies on homosexuality.

The Tory leader, whose party is likely to win in this year’s general election, strove to convince homosexuals that the new Conservative Party would be as friendly to them and their political goals as Labour had been under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. He apologized for past Tory policies that were against the gay agenda, saying, “That has changed. I think we can look gay people in the eye and say, ‘You can now back us... because we now support gay equality’.”

The Labour government has promised Stonewall, the U.K.’s leading homosexualist political lobby, “crackdowns” on “faith-based” bullying in schools and guidelines that will “compel” religious schools to comply with the normalization of homosexuality.

Religious schools, they have said, must not teach Christian doctrine on sexuality “as though it is true.”

In his interview with Attitude, Cameron effectively pledged his party to continuing these policies that many fear amount to government suppression of religious expression.

Asked, “Do you think that the right of gay children to have a safe education trumps the right of faith schools to teach that homosexuality is a sin?” Cameron, a practicing Anglican replied, “Basically yes - that's the short answer to that, without getting into a long religious exegesis. I mean, I think, yes.

“I mean, I think, yes. I think..... [long pause] that if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality.”

“I don't want to get into an enormous row with the [Anglican] Archbishop [of Canterbury, Rowan Williams] here. But I think the Church [of England] has to do some of the things that the Conservative Party has been through - sorting this issue out and recognizing that full equality is a bottom line full essential.”

Cameron assured Attitude’s Johann Hari that the Conservative Party had changed since the days of Margaret Thatcher, who in 1988 installed Section 28, the amendment to the Local Government Act 1986 that said local authorities “shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality.” Section 28 was repealed in 2003 after heavy lobbying by homosexualist activists.

Cameron said that the idea of changing homosexual civil partnerships to marriage is “worth looking at” and said that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children. He even said he was confident that he could convince the Catholic hierarchy of Scotland that “there are occasions when gay adoption is a perfectly sensible and straightforward thing.”

The “ideal adoption,” he said, is “finding a mum and dad, but there will be occasions when gay couples make very good adoptive parents. So I support gay adoption.”

When Hari pointed out that the virulently anti-religious National Secular Society has called for the defunding of religious schools on the grounds that they are hothouses of homophobia, Cameron did not disagree, saying only, “This is not the aim of our policy.

“I think you prevent it from happening by having some good ground rules about the teaching of things like sex education and some clear rules about what faith organizations are and are not allowed to do.”

Asked his stand on the Christian marriage registrar who was sacked for refusing to perform homosexual civil partnership ceremonies, Cameron said that “faith-based organizations and charities” should be encouraged: “As long as they are not discriminating in any way in the services that they provide, you're fine.”

“I think if you are a Catholic prison charity, as long as your services are available to everyone, no matter what their religion, their sexuality, their ethnicity, you're fine. We shouldn't force you to become a multi-faith group. You can be a single faith group. But you must not discriminate in the provision of your services. It seems to me that is the key distinction that you have to make.”

Ruth Gledhill, religion editor for the Daily Telegraph, commented, “From this logic, then, I assume he will force charities for blind people also to offer their services to deaf people. I've long thought it discriminatory that, as an able-bodied person, I'm not entitled to a disabled parking permit.

“How far is this ludicrous equal rights scenario going to go? Even further down the road to ridiculous extremes under the Tories than it already has under Labour, it seems.”

Cameron’s comments about the Church of England closely echo those of former Prime Minster Tony Blair in an interview with Hari for the same magazine last year. Blair, who was received into the Catholic Church December 2007 by the former Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster Cormac Murphy O’Connor, said that the Catholic Church needs to “rethink” its “position” on homosexuality.

Blair’s comments were widely ridiculed even in the mainstream press and prompted the current Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, to remind Blair that he does not speak for the Catholic Church.


Read related LSN coverage:

Tony and Cherie Blair Attack Pope on Homosexuality and Condoms
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040803.html

British Catholic Schools Targeted For Refusing to Implement School “anti-homophobic” Bullying Policies
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/may/07053108.html

Creating Rights to Destroy Rights (www.frc.org)

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the constitutional right of freedom of association. In 1995, the Court slapped down 9-0 an attempt by gay groups in Boston to force their way into the city's annual St. Patrick's Day parade. Then, in 2000, the Court upheld, though narrowly, the right of the Boy Scouts to refuse to retain a scout leader who announced his homosexuality.

Now, the assault continues. The Christian Legal Society at Hastings Law Center in California is fighting attempts for force it to admit avowed homosexuals to its membership. David French, of the Alliance Defense Fund, sums up what the Left is trying to do. "The Left is trying to create a right that destroys a right.

As of now, there is simply no widely recognized right of private citizens to join any private expressive association they want to join -- regardless of their belief or conduct. In fact, even in the campus environment, only the courts of the Ninth Circuit have forcibly opened private associations to non-adherents."

Even if the Supreme Court upholds the rights of the Christian Legal Society, this ongoing assault is a huge burden for Christian groups. And it is intended to be.
Ceaseless harassment is the order of the day from the "tolerance" lobby.

The Attack on Freedom of Speech by the Thought Police is inherently Misandrist, if only because the very concept of Misandry is a Thought Crime to them.
That there are certain definable elements inside this pogrom designed and driven by hyper militant zealots to censor and silence those who would oppose evil such as Misandry, is understood if not admitted by most observers.

However, when it comes time to expose who is driving the bus off the cliff, some folks are so put off by the potential for acts of hatred carried out in retaliation and associated threats, that they self censor in advance.

Which is perfectly fine with the Radical Leftist / Gender Feminist / Homosexualist Thought Police; as it frees them to go after those who follow through on their positions.

Which is Not to say that those who self censor now are going to be left unmolested indefinitely, but rather that the concept of divide and conquer allots different time frames to subduing different targets...

And right now the Schools are the Prime Target, as that is where the most damage can be done by the fewest Kommisars.

Ohso.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
'Sleight of hand' measure favors homosexuals
Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 2/11/2010

The Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual activist group, is applauding the congressional introduction of the Student Nondiscrimination Act of 2010.

The measure (H.R. 4530) would prohibit discrimination against any public school student on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, but Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow that there is no evidence of systematic discrimination against children who self-identify as homosexual or transgender.

Matt Barber"This is really a sleight of hand, [a] cynical political maneuver by the homosexual activist lobby attempting to once again garner victimhood status for people based on abhorrent sexual behaviors," Barber suspects.

While Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO), the introducer of the bill, contends that alleged discrimination leads to high dropout rates and underachievement, the Liberty Counsel attorney points out that there are already laws that protect students from bullying.

"The true motive here is to essentially codify, to treat those who hold traditional values, officially to have the government treat them as the modern-day racist," he comments. "The idea here is to outlaw...opposition to the homosexual lifestyle, not to garner any needed protections against discrimination for gay and lesbian students."

Barber further notes that former homosexuals who have come out of the lifestyle have no such protections -- and though they are harassed, he notes they receive no special protection under the law.

The Prosecutions for Thought Crime are just beginning, but when such a rabidly fanatical alliance of Misandrist Perverts and Hatemongers as make up the Thought Police are empowered by laws such as the 'Hate Crimes' act - they soon resemble their power mad predecessors of the National Homo-Socialist Third Reich and the pogroms instituted under their own 'Nuremberg' laws.

Only this time there is no beacon of hope in the west willing to send its Sons to end the evil, and a second landing at Normandy will not free anyone but some tourist agents. The Men that won WW-2 knew that whatever they fought for, it was not the age of a new Fourth Reich of the Abomination...

What a shame that their own country turned on their sacrifice and dishonored it in order to pander to the same sickness that destroyed the old Weimar Republic; and what a tragedy for the world that this time the same forces of evil are winning through applying the propaganda of hollywerid magic and the bribes of craven self interest.

Can you say "good germans" anyone?

How About - "Tolerance Macht Frei'????

Ohso
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Christian speech targeted as 'hate'
'Gays' pledge to 'pursue every method' of protesting school flyers
February 08, 2010 By Bob Unruh © 2010 WorldNetDaily

A campaign has been launched in Montgomery County, Md., to classify the speech of advocates for people who choose to leave the homosexual lifestyle as "hate speech," which then could be banned under a new law signed last year by President Obama.

"Hate speech is unwelcome in Montgomery County Public Schools," said an e-mail to the offices of Regina Griggs, national director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, known as PFOX. "I would like to ask that you immediately cease distribution of your flyers at our public schools.

"We intend to pursue every method possible to protest your actions if you choose to continue," the message warned.

The conflict was sparked by competing flyers distributed recently to public school students, one from PFOX, which reaches out to all those leaving the homosexual lifestyle regardless of religious affiliation, and the other from the homosexual-rights group PFLAG, or Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays...

WND has reported on Obama's "hate crimes" plan, which was adopted by Congress after Democrats piggy-backed it onto a defense appropriations bill.

The law was targeted just days ago by a lawsuit alleging it violates the civil rights of Christians and pastors, who according to the complaint now can become the target of federal investigations, grand juries and even charges for no more than opposing the activism of homosexuals.

Part of the PFLAG flyer offering help for students who want to pursue a homosexual lifestyle

The lawsuit was filed by the Thomas More Law Center in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Pastors Levon Yuille, Rene Ouellette, James Combs and Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan.

In Montgomery County, the second flyer, from PFOX, explained "former homosexuals do not think something is wrong with them because they decided to fulfill their heterosexual potential by overcoming unwanted same-sex attractions."

The flyer from PFOX offered resources to help with "tolerance for everyone regardless of sexual orientation" for parents and students such as event speakers, books for libraries and brochures.

It said, "No one should be labeled based on the perception of others. Get smart! Explore the origins of your same-sex attraction. ... The decision of a prom date, a car, or whether to super-size those fries can be based on a feeling, but important decisions should not be made on feelings alone."

One e-mail to PFOX, purportedly from a member of the county school district staff, said, "It is called freedom of speech unless it is hate-based and you people are sadly full of only that, hate."

"You say we are not being 'tolerant' of ex-gays ... and PFOX says it is not anti-gay … yet you people seem to HATE anything and everything that has to do with the way God wanted gay people," the note continued. "Separation of church and state … read the U.S. Constitution." The note said, "You people are like the KKK but only in the form of religion … you should be ashamed of yourselves."


Part of the PFOX flyer offering help for students who want to leave a homosexual lifestyle

PFOX already has raised the issue with the district's board of directors, noting, "while distributing informative flyers to students and urging tolerance for sexual orientation, PFOX was harassed by several teachers. … "

Griggs told WND she's concerned about the attempt to define organization's speech as "hate speech," which could prompt the attention of federal prosecutors.

"What we have is people saying, 'I'm gay and I don't like what your said,'" she told WND, "'and I'm going to sue you.'"

At a pro-homosexual website called change.org, signatures are being gathered for a letter to the district opposing the free speech of PFOX officials.

"Handing out these [flyers] to students is damaging. In the first place it tells LGBT students that they should desire to change their sexual orientation. In the second place, it reaffirms for many the stereotypes that being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender is unnatural, or something that can be easily changed or manipulated," the letter states.

"There's no place for these [flyers] in Montgomery County Public Schools, or in any public schools. I would like … a statement that your school district will pledge to institute a process whereby [flyers] that are not based on facts – in this case scientific facts about sexual orientation – won't be handed out to students," the letter said.

At the web page's forum, contributors were nearly unanimous in condemning PFOX's brochure:

* People die as a result of these (ex-"gay") programs. They are a threat to public health.

* This is why you cant (sic) give religious people even a nanometer because they take a friggen Astronomical Unit.

* Whenever any young gay/lesbian decides to end their lives via suicide – groups like this need to know that they have blood on their hands!!

* The county has one of the most comprehensive non-discrimination and anti-hate speech policies in the country. You'd think telling gay teenagers they can magically turn straight would fall under that.

* Free speech does not mean that groups such as PFOX should be permitted to distribute incorrect and demeaning information like this to high school students.

* There is no excuse for this. There should be an ethical policy your school can use to stop these flyers. … Telling people they can change something (sic) cannot, that uses guilt, shame, and fear, IS hate speech.

Griggs told WND her organization has watched the attacks increase since Obama took office and implemented an agenda friendly to homosexual causes.

"What it has done … we have become the targets. They feel justified. They feel protected," she said.

But she noted a Washington judge has ruled homosexuality is not immutable, so the attacks are just "unadulterated hate."

"I have never seen the likes of this," she said.

In the change.org commentary, the author wrote, "While the school district was required in 2006 to begin distributing outside organizations' propaganda on a quarterly basis, that order did not include the propaganda of hate groups. … the MCPS does not wish to confront the obvious truth that PFOX is a hate group."

Another e-mail warned PFOX that "Hitler was a devout Christian and most Christian and evangelical religious groups are actively taking a page from his writings. … It breaks my heart that so many Christians thoughtlessly want an American version of the Taliban."

Said yet another, "I feel that telling students not to discriminate against the ex-gay community is hurtful. … The ex-gay community should be the least of anyones (sic) concerns."

Another who identified himself as a teacher in the district said, "Homophobia is the problem for gay-related issues, not being gay. … Stay out of our schools and leave our children alone!"

Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, said at the time the lawsuit over the "hate crimes" law was filed, "There is no legitimate law enforcement need for this federal law. Of the 1.38 million violent crimes reported in the U.S. by the FBI in 2008, only 243 were considered as motivated by the victim's sexual orientation. Moreover, [Attorney General] Eric Holder himself testified at a Senate hearing that the states are doing a fine job in this area."

He called it a "political payoff" to homosexual advocacy groups for support of Obama in the last presidential election.

"The sole purpose of this law is to criminalize the Bible and use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin. It elevates those persons who engage in deviant sexual behaviors, including pedophiles, to a special protected class of persons as a matter of federal law and policy," Thompson said.

The Hate Crimes Act was dubbed by its critics as the "Pedophile Protection Act," after an amendment to explicitly prohibit pedophiles from being protected by the act was defeated by majority Democrats. In fact, during congressional debate, supporters argued that all "philias," or alternative sexual lifestyles, should be protected.

The law was promoted by its advocates as a crackdown on "bias" crimes motivated by a person's "actual or perceived" "sexual orientation" or "gender identity."

Thomas More attorney Robert Muise noted, "This new federal law promotes two Orwellian concepts. It creates a special class of persons who are 'more equal than others' based on nothing more than deviant, sexual behavior. And it creates 'thought crimes' by criminalizing certain ideas, beliefs, and opinions, and the involvement of such ideas, beliefs, and opinions in a crime will make it deserving of federal prosecution."

Obama signed the "Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act" in October 2009 after Democrats strategically attached it to a "must-pass" $680 billion defense-appropriations bill.

The law cracks down on any acts that could be linked to criticism of homosexuality or even the "perception" of homosexuality. As Congress debated it, there were assurances it would not be used to crack down on speech.

Obama boasted of the "hate crimes" bill when he signed it into law.

"After more than a decade, we've passed inclusive hate-crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray or who they are," he said.

The bill signed by Obama was opposed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which called it a "menace" to civil liberties. The commission argued the law allows federal authorities to bring charges against individuals even if they've already been cleared in a state court.

New Hampshire Considers Pro-Homosexual Curriculum Bill

By Kathleen Gilbert CONCORD, New Hampshire, February 11, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Pro-family advocates are urging a New Hampshire legislative committee not to pass an "anti-bullying" measure that has been amended to include specific protections for homosexuality and transgenderism.
Especially troublesome to pro-family advocates, the measure, due up for consideration today, also calls for such a policy to be reflected in schools' curricula.

Cornerstone Policy Research (CPR), a local pro-family organization, testified in a hearing against a change in HB 1523 that inserted the terms "sexual orientation" and "gender identity and expression" among a list of specially protected "characteristics" under the law.

The measure also states that, “To the extent possible, the school district policy should be integrated with the school’s curriculum, discipline policies, behavior programs, and other violence prevention efforts."

The Education Committee rejected language proposed by Kevin Smith, Executive Director of Cornerstone Policy Research, that would have provided blanket protection against bullying to every child, rather than enumerating specific protected characteristics.

New Hampshire legalized same-sex "marriage" last June. Advocates of gay "marriage" have forcefully dismissed as misleading arguments that abolishing the traditional definition of marriage would affect public school education.
However, parents from states that have adopted same-sex "marriage" have time and again come forward with stories of how acceptance of homosexuality has affected their children's curriculum.

A 2008 field trip at a San Francisco elementary drew national criticism for encouraging a class of six-year-olds to celebrate the "wedding" of one of their teachers to her lesbian partner. Liz Jaroflow, the interim director of the 18 Creative Arts Charter School, called the event a "teachable moment" given the historic significance of same-sex "marriage" in the state.

In 2009, the Alameda school board adopted a mandatory curriculum promoting the homosexual lifestyle to children as young as five years old.

CPR pointed out that "respect" for homosexuality was cited by a Massachusetts federal judge in 2007, when ruling against a father suing the Lexington school board for reading a homosexual love story to his six-year-old son without prior warning.

"The Department of Education requires that all public schools teach respect for all individuals regardless of, among other things, sexual orientation,” wrote Judge Mark L. Wolf, saying that it is therefore “reasonable for public educators to teach elementary school students about individuals with different sexual orientations and about various forms of families."


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Maine Homosexualists Frantically Refute Evidence that Same-Sex "Marriage" Would Affect Schools
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09102103.html

Massachusetts Pro-family Activist Warns What Allowing Same-Sex "Marriage" Brings to Society
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08102310.html

California Elementary School Parents Blindsided by Homosexual “Coming Out Day”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08102306.html

'Defeating the Totalitarian Lie'
Former Hitler Youth gives chilling but life-saving warning to America
February 12, 2010 © 2010 WorldNetDaily

Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism, warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth / author of the book: "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America,"

"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and founder of the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – the key, he believes, to keeping America free.

"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition.

The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."Von Campe grew up under the Nazis, served in the Hitler Youth and fought against the Red Army in the Yugoslavian theater as a tank gunner in the German army. He was captured at the end of the war and escaped five months later from a prisoner of war camp in Communist Yugoslavia.

"It took me a long time to understand and define the nature of National Socialism," says von Campe. "And, unfortunately, their philosophy continues to flourish under different labels remaining a menace to America and free human society."

Von Campe's message is that political freedom and democratic rules alone are not sufficient to govern humanity justly.

"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse.
This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."

Von Campe says he sees spiritual parallels among Americans and his childhood Germany.

"The silence from our pulpits regarding the moral collapse of American society from within is not very different from the silence that echoed from the pulpits in Germany toward Nazi policies," he explains. "Our family lived through the Nazi years in Germany, an experience typical of millions of Europeans regardless of what side they were on.

We paid a high price for the moral perversions of a German government, which excluded God and His Commandments from their policies. America must not continue following the same path to destruction, but instead heed the lessons of history and the warning I am giving."

"""Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship ""
"" 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" ""


Von Campe's comments are based on hard experience living in a totalitarian horror so he knows what he the is talking about and can discern the red flags

clearly the feminit hegemony is Fascist as like all Fascist systems there are the Aryans (wimyn) and the subhumans (men) and each lives under different interpretations of the "law" one favourable ansdthe other oppressive and clearly in the USA today men don't live under the favourable one

Speak the truth, defend your rights
Bill Bumpas - OneNewsNow - 2/15/2010

A pro-family advocate in Michigan says he's honored to be on the front lines in fighting for First Amendment rights to speak out against homosexuality.

Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, is concerned that the "Hate Crimes Act" signed into law last year will be used to prosecute those who speak in favor of traditional biblical morality. He cites a personal example.

"Several years ago Cardinal Adam Maida of Detroit and I were personally accused by the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force in a news release of being responsible for inciting the alleged beating death of a 72-year-old homosexual man in Detroit, merely because we had actively supported Michigan's Marriage Protection Amendment reaffirming marriage as only between a man and a woman," he remarks.

Glenn says aside from the fact that officials found that there was no assault and the man died of natural causes, it illustrates the point that preachers of biblical truth are being targeted. He encourages boldness.

"Don't be intimidated," he counsels. "Continue to speak biblical truth; continue to tell people that marriage is and always has been between one man and one woman -- that's what's best for society, best for children. And stand up against these continuing restrictions on the exercise of free speech."

Glenn and three Michigan pastors recently challenged the constitutionality of the Hate Crimes Act by filing a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. Their attorney argues the law violates his clients' rights to freedom of speech, expressive association, and free exercise of religion as protected under the First Amendment.