by Mass Resistance

The stunning anti-family actions and political appointments of Barack Obama since taking office, some of which we've chronicled here, are unprecedented in America, maybe even in the world.  But this even shocked us.

Obama appoints Kevin Jennings to Dept. of Education post

Kevin Jennings is the founder of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN), an aggressive national homosexual organization targeting children in the public schools.  In high schools and middle schools across the country GLSEN runs "gay straight alliance" clubs and promotes the Day of Silence, among myriad other destructive homosexual and transgender activities.

Now we've learned that the Obama administration has appointed Kevin Jennings to be Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools in the US Department of Education!

          Dept of Education press release announcing appointment.

And the reaction in conservative press:

          WorldNetDaily: 'Gay' activist to oversee public classroom 'safety'

          Americans for Truth: AFTA calls for withdrawal of nomination

In Massachusetts, where Jennings founded GLSEN, GLSEN is a major member of the Mass. Commission on GLBT Youth.  GLSEN also holds yearly conferences for children and teachers on the latest techniques for pushing homosexual behavior on kids as young as Kindergarten age.  Click HERE for this year's GLSEN Conference.

In 2005, GLSEN distributed the horrific Little Black Book of homosexual pornography to kids at Brookline High School..

But Kevin Jennings and GLSEN are probably best known for the horrific "Fistgate" incident in 2000, where children as young as 12 were taught homosexual sex acts by state employees.  The incident attracted national attention, but GLSEN defended the conference and activities.

          CLICK HERE for report on the infamous "Fistgate" incident

We will be posting more on Jennings and GLSEN very soon, including the actual recordings from the "Fistgate" incident which made national news.

Obama declares June to be "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month."

This is so offensive and bizarre that we don't even know how to comment on it.

The very thought of a US President doing something like has been up until now incomprehensible.  You'll have to look at it for yourself . . .

CLICK HERE for Obama's proclamation

by Mass Resistance


Gov. Deval Patrick and the Massachusetts Legislature have reacted to public outrage.

On Wednesday April 15, the Massachusetts House of Representatives released its version of the FY2010 state budget. To the shock of the homosexual lobby, the entire $850,000 that was funded this past year for homosexual programs in the public schools is gone!  This follows several months of phone calls, emails, personal conversations and even calls to talk radio by angry parents.

The budget now goes to the Senate.  This represents the first time since the early 1990's (the Weld administration) that no state funds were specifically earmarked for homosexual activism in the schools.

The Governor's budget recommendations had been released earlier and also eliminated that funding. But those were just recommendations.  Everyone had been waiting to see what the House Ways and Means Committee would do.  Despite pressure from the homosexual lobby, they didn't put it back in.

The combination of the huge state budget deficits and enflamed outrage by parents over such an enormous amount of money being used for such offensive purposes proved to be too much. Although the money could still find its way back in when the Senate releases its version, and the homosexual lobby will attempt to do that, this is a huge victory for the pro-family cause.

Stunned reaction by homosexual activists

The homosexual lobby seems to have been taken by surprise.  And they are vowing to push hard to get the money back.  According to their recent statement, they will be using the emotional (and Orwellian) cry of "student safety."

This was printed in the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows this week:

In a statement to Bay Windows, the Massachusetts Commission on GLBT Youth said it believes House Ways and Means has eliminated all the funding for LGBT youth programs, which were funded at $850,000 in the FY 09 budget.

"We are currently still determining the impact, but it seems that funding for GLBT youth both from the Department of Public Health and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has been completely eliminated," said the statement. "The commission plans to quickly work with our legislators to restore as much of the funding as we can.  GLBT youth continue to have pressing health and safety needs, particularly youth of color and transgender...

Read entire article here

Funding hardcore homosexual activism targeting schoolchildren

The $850,000 has been every parent's nightmare.  This money is put in control of the Mass. Commission for Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth, which includes the most radical groups and individuals in the state.  The two main leaders have been a woman with a beard and sideburns and a man who cross-dresses.  They see their next frontier as the transgender movement, which they promote heavily in addition to homosexuality and bisexuality. They set up homosexual clubs in high schools and middle schools, fund and put on homosexual programs and assemblies.  They organize homosexual curriculum in the elementary schools. They often work directly with kids, with no outside supervision. Furthermore, they intimidate and threaten school officials who balk at allowing their activities. They also put on extra-curricular activities off-campus, such as the "Youth Pride" march and the "transgender prom", alone with kids.

Governor's budget recommendations were a good sign

Each year the Governor makes budget recommendations, then the actual budget proposal is made by the House, and passed on to the Senate.  Finally, the Governor can sign it or veto portions of it.

On January 28, the Governor released his FY 2010 budget recommendations.  Although these are just "recommendations" to the Legislature, and are largely political in nature, virtually all of the homosexual-related (and other "human service items") in the budget were cut, along with many other things.  Governor Patrick obviously assumed that the more political Legislature would decide what to put back in, and thus take the pressure off of himself.

This is a great turn of events! But it was assumed that the homosexual lobby (and the other special-interest groups) would hammer the House to get the money back in. Thus, there were lots of special-interest "lobby days" in February and March, as the House Ways and Means Committee made these decisions.

But obviously our flood of calls and emails, etc., had an effect!  When the House budget came out this week, they put a LOT of stuff back in, but not this.

Here's our analysis of the budget items
used to funnel money to homosexual programs
into the schools

We're also keeping our eye on one other budget item

There's also a "domestic violence and sexual assault" item (analyzed in the link above) in the budget that merits scrutiny (#4513-1130 currently budgeted for $4,058,264 in the House version).  This past year it was over $6 million. The Governor had downsized that whole item to $0.

This item includes (among several other things) the phrase "statewide suicide and violence prevention outreach to gay and lesbian youth" but it does not have a specific earmarked dollar amount.  In the past, little if any actual money got diverted to the homosexual school programs from this item.  This year, the homosexual lobby doesn't think that much could be diverted to their purposes but we'll keep an eye on it.

Our work's not done on this! We must keep it stopped!

The budget is now at the Senate Ways and Means Committee, then goes to the full Senate. This could be trouble.  Last year the House budgeted $750,000 for the homosexual programs, and the Senate RAISED it to $850,000!

Here's how that happened: After lots of pressure, the Senate Ways and Means Committee lowered the amount by $200,000 -- to $550,000.  But then when it got to the full Senate, pro-homosexual Senate President Therese Murray, along with now-disgraced former Sen. Diane Wilkerson {Dianne Wilkerson was photographed "..stuffing bribe money under her sweater" and arrested by FBI agents. - Ed.}, slithered an amendment through to raise it to $850,000! Unfortunately, not one Senator spoke out in opposition to this.

DON'T let that happen again. Call the Senate President and Chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee and tell him to KEEP the state funding for homosexual programs in our public schools OUT of the 2010 budget! Make sure they get the message this time!

Senate President Therese Murray (D-Plymouth)
Phone: 617-722-1500
Email: Therese.Murray@state.ma.us

Senate Ways & Means Chairman Steven Panagiotakos (D-Lowell)
Phone: 617-722-1630
Email: Steven.Panagiotakos@state.ma.us

We must keep fighting

This fight isn't over yet. We must continue to keep up the pressure! If we DON'T do it, it won't happen!
There are a lot of other battles looming, necessary pro-family bills that should be passed and bad bills that must be stopped. However, this is a great victory.

We have always believed that to be effective, a pro-family political organization must be willing to tell the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it is, and not be afraid to be a confrontational when necessary.  These are very important issues! We must keep in mind that these politicians work for us, not the special interests. All of our successes have come from that approach.

We'll keep you up to date.

{Edited for clarity and space considerations - Ed.}

 By Timothy Matthews

Western civilization at the present day is passing through a crisis which is essentially different from anything that has been previously experienced. Other societies in the past have changed their social institutions or their religious beliefs under the influence of external forces or the slow development of internal growth. But none, like our own, has ever consciously faced the prospect of a fundamental alteration of the beliefs and institutions on which the whole fabric of social life rests ... Civilization is being uprooted from its foundations in nature and tradition and is being reconstituted in a new organisation which is as artificial and mechanical as a modern factory. - Christopher Dawson. Enquiries into Religion and Culture, p. 259.

A priest in Russia claims that we now, in the West, live in a Communist society. This explains the onslaught of officialdom, which in many countries worldwide, has so successfully been removing the rights of parents to be the primary educators and protectors of their children.

The ACW Review examined the corrosive work of the Frankfurt School - a group of German-American scholars who developed highly provocative and original perspectives on contemporary society and culture, drawing on Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, and Weber. Not that their idea of a ˜cultural revolution" was particularly new. "Until now, wrote Joseph, Comte de Maistre (1753-1821) who for fifteen years was a Freemason,˜ nations were killed by conquest, that is by invasion: But here an important question arises; can a nation not die on its own soil, without resettlement or invasion, by allowing the flies of decomposition to corrupt to the very core those original and constituent principles which make it what it is.'

What was the Frankfurt School? Well, in the days following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it was believed that worker's revolution would sweep into Europe and, eventually, into the United States. But it did not do so. Towards the end of 1922 the Communist International (Comintern) began to consider what were the reasons. On Lenin's initiative a meeting was organised at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow.

The aim of the meeting was to clarify the concept of, and give concrete effect to, a Marxist cultural revolution. Amongst those present were Georg Lukacs (a Hungarian aristocrat, son of a banker, who had become a Communist during World War I ; a good Marxist theoretician he developed the idea of ˜Revolution and Eros" - sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction) and Willi Munzenberg (whose proposed solution was to ˜organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat˜ It was, said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007) the conservative author and co-founder of the ˜National Review, a meeting perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.'

Lenin died in 1924. By this time, however, Stalin was beginning to look on Munzenberg, Lukacs and like-thinkers as ˜revisionists." In June 1940, Munzenberg fled to the south of France where, on Stalin's orders, a NKVD assassination squad caught up with him and hanged him from a tree.

In the summer of 1924, after being attacked for his writings by the 5th Comintern Congress, Lukacs moved to Germany, where he chaired the first meeting of a group of Communist-oriented sociologists, a gathering that was to lead to the foundation of the Frankfurt School.

This School (designed to put flesh on their revolutionary programme) was started at the University of Frankfurt in the Institut Sozialforschung. Initially, school and institute were indistinguishable. In 1923 the Institute was officially established, and funded by Felix Weil (1898-1975). Weil was born in Argentina and at the age of nine was sent to attend school in Germany. He attended the universities in Tabingen and Frankfurt, where he graduated with a doctoral degree in political science. While at these universities he became increasingly interested in socialism and Marxism. According to the intellectual historian Martin Jay, the topic of his dissertation was ˜the practical problems of implementing socialism.'

Carl Granberg, the Institute's director from 1923-1929, was an avowed Marxist, although the Institute did not have any official party affiliations. But in 1930 Max Horkheimer assumed control and he believed that Marx's theory should be the basis of the Institute's research. When Hitler came to power, the Institut was closed and its members, by various routes, fled to the United States and migrated to major US universities, Columbia, Princeton, Brandeis, and California at Berkeley.

The School included among its members the 1960s guru of the New Left: Herbert Marcuse, Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, the popular writer Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Jurgen Habermas - possibly the School's most influential representative.

Basically, the Frankfurt School believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary to provoke socialist revolution. Their task, therefore, was as swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do this they called for the most negative destructive criticism possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the ˜oppressive order˜. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a virus continuing the work of the Western Marxists by other means as one of their members noted.

To further the advance of their quiet cultural revolution - the School recommended (among other things):

1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools' and teachers' authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family

One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of ˜pansexualism˜- the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:

* attack the authority of the father, deny the roles of father and mother, and wrest away from  families their rights as primary educators of their children.
* abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
* abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces
* declare women to be an ˜oppressed class˜ and men as ˜oppressors˜

Munzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School's long-term operation thus: ˜We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.'

The School believed there were two types of revolution: (a) political and (b) cultural. Cultural revolution demolishes from within. Modern forms of subjection are marked by mildness. They saw it as a long-term project and kept their sights clearly focused on the family, education, media, sex and popular culture.

The Family: The School's Critical Theory preached that the ˜authoritarian personality˜ is a product of the patriarchal family - an idea directly linked to Engels's 'Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State', which promoted matriarchy. Already Karl Marx had written, in the Communist Manifesto, about the radical notion of a ˜community of women˜ and in The German Ideology of 1845, written disparagingly about the idea of the family as the basic unit of society. This was one of the fundamental tenets of the ˜Critical Theory˜ : the necessity of breaking down the contemporary family. The Institute scholars preached that ˜Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change.˜

Following Karl Marx, the School stressed how the ˜authoritarian personality is a product of the patriarchal family”it was Marx who wrote so disparagingly about the idea of the family being the basic unit of society. All this prepared the way for the warfare against the masculine gender promoted by Marcuse under the guise of ˜women's liberation˜and the New Left movement in the 1960s.

They proposed transforming our culture into a female-dominated one. In 1933, Wilhelm Reich, one of their members, wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of ˜natural society.˜ Eric Fromm was also an active advocate of matriarchal theory. Masculinity and femininity, he claimed, were not reflections of ˜essential sexual differences, as the Romantics had thought but were derived instead from differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined.˜ His dogma was the precedent for the radical feminist pronouncements that, today, appear in nearly every major newspaper and television program.

The revolutionaries knew exactly what they wanted to do and how to do it. They have succeeded.

Education: Lord Bertrand Russell joined with the Frankfurt School in their effort at mass social engineering and spilled the beans in his 1951 book, The Impact of Science on Society. He wrote: ˜Physiology and psychology afford fields for scientific technique which still await development.' The importance of mass psychology has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called ˜education.˜ The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate, It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.

Writing in 1992 in Fidelio Magazine, [The Frankfurt School and Political Correctness] Michael Minnicino observed how the heirs of Marcuse and Adorno now completely dominate the universities, teaching their own students to replace reason with ˜ Politically Correct˜ ritual exercises. There are very few theoretical books on arts, letters, or language published today in the United States or Europe which do not openly acknowledge their debt to the Frankfurt School. The witchhunt on today's campuses is merely the implementation of Marcuse's concept of ˜repressive toleration˜, i.e. tolerance for movements from the left, but intolerance for movements from the right -enforced by the students of the Frankfurt School.

Drugs: Dr. Timothy Leary gave us another glimpse into the mind of the Frankfurt School in his account of the work of the Harvard University Psychedelic Drug Project, ˜Flashback.˜  He quoted a conversation that he had with Aldous Huxley: “These brain drugs, mass produced in the laboratories, will bring about vast changes in society. This will happen with or without you or me. All we can do is spread the word. The obstacle to this evolution, Timothy, is the Bible. Leary then went on: "We had run up against the Judeo-Christian commitment to one God, one religion, one reality, that has cursed Europe for centuries and America since our founding days. Drugs that open the mind to multiple realities inevitably lead to a polytheistic view of the universe. We sensed that the time for a new humanist religion based on intelligence, good-natured pluralism and scientific paganism had arrived."

One of the directors of the Authoritarian Personality project, R. Nevitt Sanford, played a pivotal role in the usage of psychedelic drugs. In 1965, he wrote in a book issued by the publishing arm of the UK's Tavistock Institute: "The nation, seems to be fascinated by our 40,000 or so drug addicts who are seen as alarmingly wayward people who must be curbed at all costs by expensive police activity. Only an uneasy Puritanism could support the practice of focusing on the drug addicts (rather than our 5 million alcoholics) and treating them as a police problem instead of a medical one, while suppressing harmless drugs such as marijuana and peyote along with the dangerous ones." The leading propagandists of today's drug lobby base their argument for legalization on the same scientific quackery spelled out years ago by Dr. Sanford.

Such propagandists include the multi-billionaire atheist George Soros who chose, as one of his first domestic programs, to fund efforts to challenge the efficacy of America's $37-billion-a-year war on drugs. The Soros-backed Lindesmith Center serves as a leading voice for Americans who want to decriminalize drug use. Soros is the 'Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization', claimed Joseph Califano Jr. of Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (The Nation, Sep 2, 1999).

Music, Television and Popular Culture: Adorno was to become head of a music studies unit, where in his Theory of Modern Music he promoted the prospect of unleashing atonal and other popular music as a weapon to destroy society, degenerate forms of music to promote mental illness. He said the US could be brought to its knees by the use of radio and television to promote a culture of pessimism and despair - by the late 1930s he (together with Horkheimer) had migrated to Hollywood.
The expansion of violent video-games also well supported the School's aims.

Sex: In his book The Closing of the American Mind, Alan Bloom observed how Marcuse appealed to university students in the sixties with a combination of Marx and Freud. In 'Eros and Civilization and One Dimensional Man' , Marcuse promised that the overcoming of capitalism and its false consciousness will result in a society where the greatest satisfactions are sexual. Rock music touches the same chord in the young. Free sexual expression, anarchism, mining of the irrational unconscious and giving it free rein are what they have in common.'

The Media: The modern media - not least Arthur P. Sulzberger Jr., who took charge of the New York Times in 1992 - drew greatly on the Frankfurt School's study The Authoritarian Personality. (New York: Harper, 1950). In his book Arrogance, (Warner Books, 1993) former CBS News reporter Bernard Goldberg noted of Sulzberger that he still believes in all those old sixties notions about liberation and changing the world man. . . In fact, the Sulzberger years have been a steady march down PC Boulevard, with a newsroom fiercely dedicated to every brand of diversity except the intellectual kind.

In 1953 the Institute moved back to the University of Frankfurt. Adorno died in 1955 and Horkheimer in 1973. The Institute of Social Research continued, but what was known as the Frankfurt School did not. The cultural Marxism that has since taken hold of our schools and universities - that is political correctness, which has been destroying our family bonds, our religious tradition and our entire culture sprang from the Frankfurt School.

It was these intellectual Marxists who, later during the anti-Vietnam demonstrations, coined the phrase, ˜make love, not war; it was these intellectuals who promoted the dialectic of negative criticism; it was these theoreticians who dreamed of a utopia where their rules governed. It was their concept that led to the current fad for the rewriting of history, and to the vogue for deconstruction. Their mantras: ˜sexual differences are a contract; if it feels good, do it; do your own thing.'

In an address at the US Naval Academy in August 1999, Dr Gerald L. Atkinson, CDR USN (Ret), gave a background briefing on the Frankfurt School, reminding his audience that it was the foot soldiers of the Frankfurt School who introduced the sensitivity training techniques used in public schools over the past 30 years (and now employed by the US military to educate the troops about sexual harassment). During ˜sensitivity training, teachers were told not to teach but to facilitate. Classrooms became centres of self-examination where children talked about their own subjective feelings. This technique was designed to convince children they were the sole authority in their own lives.

Atkinson continued: The Authoritarian personality, studied by the Frankfurt School in the 1940s and 1950s in America, prepared the way for the subsequent warfare against the masculine gender promoted by Herbert Marcuse and his band of social revolutionaries under the guise of ˜women's liberation and the New Left movement in the 1960s. The evidence that psychological techniques for changing personality is intended to mean emasculation of the American male is provided by Abraham Maslow, founder of Third Force Humanist Psychology and a promoter of the psychotherapeutic classroom, who wrote that, ... "the next step in personal evolution is a transcendence of both masculinity and femininity to general humanness."

The Network: In her booklet Sex & Social Engineering (Family Education Trust 1994) Valerie Riches observed how in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were intensive parliamentary campaigns taking place emanating from a number of organisations in the field of birth control (i.e., contraception, abortion, sterilisation). ˜From an analysis of their annual reports, it became apparent that a comparatively small number of people were involved to a surprising degree in an array of pressure groups. This network was not only linked by personnel, but by funds, ideology and sometimes addresses: it was also backed by vested interests and supported by grants in some cases by government departments. At the heart of the network was the Family Planning Association (FPA) with its own collection of offshoots. What we unearthed was a power structure with enormous influence.

During our investigations, a speaker at a Sex Education Symposium in Liverpool outlined tactics of sex education saying: ˜if we do not get into sex education, children will simply follow the mores of their parents". The fact that sex education was to be the vehicle for peddlers of secular humanism soon became apparent.

Soon after, a little book was published with the intriguing title The Men Behind Hitler”, a German Warning to the World. Its thesis was that the eugenics movement, which had gained popularity early in the twentieth century, had gone underground following the holocaust in Nazi Germany, but was still active and functioning through organizations promoting abortion, euthanasia, sterilization, mental health, etc. The author urged the reader to look at his home country and neighbouring countries, for he would surely find that members and committees of these organizations would cross-check to a remarkable extent.

Other books and papers from independent sources later confirmed this situation.  A remarkable book was also published in America which documented the activities of the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). It was entitled The SIECUS Circle A Humanist Revolution. SIECUS was set up in 1964 and lost no time in engaging in a program of social engineering by means of sex education in the schools. Its first executive director was Mary Calderone, who was also closely linked to Planned Parenthood, the American equivalent of the British FPA. According to The SIECUS Circle, Calderone supported sentiments and theories put forward by Rudolph Dreikus, a humanist, such as:

* merging or reversing the sexes or sex roles;
* liberating children from their families;
* abolishing the family as we know it

In their book Mind Siege, (Thomas Nelson, 2000) Tim LaHaye and David A. Noebel confirmed Riches's findings of an international network. ˜The leading authorities of Secular Humanism: John Dewey; Isaac Asimov, Paul Kurtz, Corliss Lamont, Bertrand Russell, Julian Huxley, Richard Dawkins, Margaret Sanger, Carl Rogers, Ted Turner; Mary Calderone and the hundreds listed in the back of Humanist Manifesto I and II, including Eugenia C. Scott, Alfred Kinsey, Abraham Maslow, Erich Fromm, Rollo May, and Betty Friedan. The common theme: "Christianity is for losers."

In the grandstands sit the sponsoring or sustaining organizations, such as the left wing of the Democratic Party; the Democratic Socialists of America; Harvard University; Yale University; University of Minnesota; University of California (Berkeley); and two thousand other colleges and universities.

'Choice' and the great emphasis placed on pupils' discussing and clarifying their own views, values and choices about any given issue. This is nothing other than the concept known as Values Clarification - a concept anathema to Christianity. This concept was pioneered in California in the 1960's by psychologists William Coulson, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. It was based on ˜humanisticâ psychology, in which patients were regarded as the sole judge of their actions and moral behaviour. Having pioneered the technique of Values Clarification the psychologists introduced it into schools and other institutions such as convents and seminaries - with disastrous results. 

Why? Because Christian institutions are founded on absolute beliefs in, for example, the Ten Commandments. Values Clarification supposes a moral relativism in which there is no absolute right or wrong and no dependence on God.

As a barrister commented recently on worrying trends in Australian education,˜The core theme of values clarification is that there are no right or wrong values. Values education does not seek to identify and transmit right values. In the absence of clear moral guidance, children naturally make choices based on feelings. Powerful peer pressure, freed from the values which stem from a divine source, ensure that shared values sink to the lowest common denominator. References to environmental sustainability lead to a mindset where anti-life arguments for population control are presented as being both responsible and desirable. Similarly, 'informed choices' about health and lifestyles are euphemisms for attitudes antithetical to Christian views on motherhood, fatherhood, the sacrament of marriage and family life. Values Clarification is covert and dangerous. It underpins the entire rationale of Citizenship (PSHE) and is to be introduced by statute into the UK soon. It will give young people secular values and imbue them with the attitude that they alone hold ultimate authority and judgement about their lives. 

We are forewarned, says Atkinson. A reading of history (it is all in mainstream historical accounts) tells us that we are about to lose the most precious thing we have, our individual freedoms.

The Frankfurt School has of course its remote origins in the 18th century Enlightenment. But like Lenin's Marxism, it is a breakaway movement. The immediate aims of both classical liberalism and the Frankfurt School have been in the main the same but the final end is different. For liberals they lead to 'improving and perfecting' western culture, for the Frankfurt School they bring about its destruction.

"Unlike hard-line Marxists, the Frankfurt School does not make any plans for the future. (But) the Frankfurt School seems to be more far-sighted that our classical liberals and secularists. At least they see the moral deviations they promote will in the end make social life impossible or intolerable. But this leaves a big question mark over what a future conducted by them would be like."

Meanwhile, the Quiet Revolution rolls forward.

by Mass Resistance

Mass. State Republican Party Chairman Jennifer Nassour's picture graces the front page of the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows. They titled her interview "The Thin Red Line."

Newly elected Republican Party Chairman Jennifer Nassour has wasted no time making it clear where she wants the party to go. Last week, in a front-page interview with the hardcore homosexual newspaper Bay Windows, she told the homosexual community that they didn't need to worry about the Republican party opposing them on "social issues" or "the culture wars."  Party Chairman says party will no longer oppose same-sex "marriage", abortion, other "social issues."

As Bay Windows reported to its readers in the article:

[H]er top priority is to reinvigorate the party's grassroots activists.  But those looking for Nassour and her colleagues at the state GOP headquarters to rally the base by campaigning for social conservative causes such as opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion will be disappointed.  Similarly, there are no plans for the party to take more progressive positions on social issues.  Nassour said the state party would steer clear of social issues under her leadership, and would support candidates for office regardless of what side they take in the culture wars.

"To me social issues are personal issues. Those are personal views, and we are not legislating here - at least I am not legislating anyone's personal views," said Nassour. "I have no personal agenda I'm trying to push through other than electing Republicans."

Instead the party will focus on economic issues, which Nassour said are winning issues for the party, given the state of the economy.  More Thin Red Line" here.

Well, she's certainly getting her message out.

This is essentially the same thing Nassour told MassResistance at a recent political event. She seems to want to make that very clear. This was the fear of many party activists who opposed her - and supported different candidates, most notably Mike Franco - at the State Committee meeting where she was elected in January. But Nassour was heavily backed by the party establishment and she won by a wide margin.

Harsh reaction by Republican activists

Pro-family Republican activists we've contacted have reacted with outrage and disgust to this "announcement" in Bay Windows.  One former Town Committee member fired an email to Nassour titled "Why I'm an ex-Republican", saying

"Social issues are not just personal.  Redefining marriage, restricting religious expression and usurping parental authority by the state in public education are not personal issues.  They affect the lives of every citizen."

People are particularly upset that Nassour (and the others quoted in the article including politicians and pro-family leaders) would participate in an interview with a newspaper that is so extremely profane, obscene, and anti-family as Bay Windows. Among other things, Bay Windows is well-known for its vicious anti-Catholic rants, its hideous demonizing of pro-family individuals, it obsessive promotion for all kinds of deviant sexual practices, and its general pornographic content.  Besides Nassour, why are Sen. Robert Hedlund, Sen. Richard Tisei, Rob Willington, and Kris Mineau talking with Bay Windows -- as if it were a legitimate media outlet?

Seriously flawed Republican strategy

We could see it coming.  In January, we couldn't find a single Republican to sponsor the David Parker Parents' Rights Bill, which would essentially cripple the homosexual movement in the schools by giving full parents power not to opt-in. We finally had to get a Democrat, William Greene (D-Billerica) to file the bill!

As in the national party, the RINOs in the party establishment are philosophically disconnected from much of the pro-family rank and file, and since the election of Bill Weld in 1990 that rift has only gotten larger. The establishment's position appears to be (1) fiscal issues will win elections, and (2) the pro-family activists have nowhere else to go, so they will eventually "listen to reason."  That approach hasn't worked yet.

Years of drifting leftward

The Republican Party has been drifting leftward since the days of Bill Weld and Paul Cellucci. But this the most extreme it's gotten and it's the first time that a break from supporting conservative social issues has been publicly stated as policy.

And since Weld and Cellucci took over in 1990, the party has continued to lose seats in the Legislature every election.

Under Mitt Romney, the party strenuously avoided social issues, particularly the homosexual "marriage" issue, even though that was the hottest issue of the day. That led to some absurd situations in the 2004 elections.  For example, Romney's people gave huge financial and organizational support to Steven Howitt, a Republican who was running to unseat then-Rep. Philip Travis (D-Rehoboth). Although a Democrat, Travis was a leading pro-life, pro-family rep. Howitt was pro-choice and endorsed by several homosexual PACs. At one point the Republican Howitt even sent out flyers warning people that the Democrat Travis wanted to "take away a woman's right to choose." (Luckily Travis won the election 63% to 37%.)

That same year pro-marriage candidates such as then-Rep. Shirley Gomes (R-Harwich) and Dr. Gilbert Lavoie (running for state senate from Boston) had to appeal to MassResistance for help because the Republicans wouldn't aid them when they needed help. (Gomes, being challenged by a lesbian activist, won re-election 57%-43% after MassResistance did a district-wide mailing.  Gil Lavoie unfortunately lost to Sen. Robert Travaglini.)

Have you had enough? Let them know!!  SOUND OFF:

Jennifer Nassour, Chairman
jennifer@massgop.com

Massachusetts Republican Party
85 Merrimac St., Suite 400
Boston, MA 02114
info@massgop.com
tel: 617-523-5005
fax: 617-523-6311

WASHINGTON {Christian Newswire} -- As promised, President Barack Obama signed an executive order this month opening up the restrictions on taxpayer funding for embryo-destroying stem cell research (ESCr).

Obama had publicly toyed with the idea of opening ESCr funding though the legislative process before settling on the use of an executive order.  The president has also formally begun the process for rescission of the recently passed HHS Conscience Regulations for pharmacists, doctors, nurses and other health professionals.

Pharmacists For Life International (PFLI) condemns this inappropriate and immoral use of presidential power in the strongest terms.  It can never be moral or ethical to kill one set of humans with the ostensible intent of healing other patients.

Current science has shown that embryonic stem cells offer little or no therapeutic value and have even shown to be dangerous and deadly to the end user.  Adult stem cells, on the other hand, have shown great promise and recently had more favorable studies published with significant therapeutic advantages.  All the latter were done using existing adult cells, without harm or destruction to tiny human embryos.

The Carnegie Model of stages of embryology and the preponderance of all scientific data over hundreds of years clearly show embryos are unique individual new humans, different from mom and dad with their own unique set of 23 pairs of chromosomes.  All embryos require is nourishment, time, and love to come to fruition, contrary to the mendacity and deception of some fake "science" and, now, the extremist anti-life regime of Barrie Hussein Obama.

America needs reasoned science and much prayer at this juncture in its history as the government takes an active stand against life, with the overt funding of the Culture of Death, rather than protecting and nourishing all human life, born and preborn.

WASHINGTON {Christian Newswire}- As promised, President Barack Obama signed an executive order on March 9th opening up the restrictions on taxpayer funding for embryo-destroying stem cell research (ESCr).

Obama had publicly toyed with the idea of opening ESCr funding though the legislative process before settling on the use of an executive order.  The president has also formally begun the process for rescission of the recently passed HHS Conscience Regulations for pharmacists, doctors, nurses and other health professionals.

Pharmacists For Life International (PFLI) condemns this inappropriate and immoral use of presidential power in the strongest terms.  It can never be moral or ethical to kill one set of humans with the ostensible intent of healing other patients.

Current science has shown that embryonic stem cells offer little or no therapeutic value and have even shown to be dangerous and deadly to the end user.  Adult stem cells, on the other hand, have shown great promise and recently had more favorable studies published with significant therapeutic advantages.  All the latter were done using existing adult cells, without harm or destruction to tiny human embryos.

The Carnegie Model of stages of embryology and the preponderance of all scientific data over hundreds of years clearly show embryos are unique individual new humans, different from mom and dad with their own unique set of 23 pairs of chromosomes.  All embryos require is nourishment, time, and love to come to fruition, contrary to the mendacity and deception of some fake "science" and now, the extremist anti-life regime of Barrie Hussein Obama.

America needs reasoned science and much prayer at this juncture in its history as the government takes an active stand against life, with the overt funding of the Culture of Death, rather than protecting and nourishing all human life, born and preborn.

WASHINGTON, March 16 /Christian Newswire/ -- Jesuit-run Georgetown University promoted "Sex Positivity" week on campus from February 24-February 28, 2009. Condoning sexual misconduct and deviance places undergraduate students, many of whom are still legally considered to be minors, in a potentially predatory and psychologically abusive environment.