"Gay" Activists Post Dress Code for Lobbying Wed. in Lansing

Triangle Foundation urges dress code Wed. at Capitol

Homosexual activist groups don’t want to
be “recognized” as homosexual activists

Family group: What don’t they want lawmakers to see?

LANSING — A who’s who of Michigan homosexual activist groups will convene at the state Capitol Wednesday to push legislation that a statewide family values organization calls a Trojan Horse bill only masquerading as protection against bullying in public schools.

The American Family Association of Michigan says the legislation would have no actual effect on student safety, but would set the precedent of creating — for the first time anywhere in Michigan law — special “protected class” status based on so-called “sexual orientation” (homosexual behavior) and “gender identity and expression” (cross-dressing).

“Obviously sensitive to the waning political prospects of their now thoroughly exposed Trojan Horse strategy, homosexual activists apparently hope it might help if they take their masquerade tactic one step further, this time literally so,” said AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn of Midland.

Glenn pointed to the website of the Triangle Foundation, a homosexual activist group based in Detroit. Denying any attempt to “censor who we are,” the Triangle website Tuesday posted an online dress code urging those planning to participate in Wednesday’s “Safe Schools Lobbying Day” not to wear clothing or costumes by which they might be “recognized” or “labeled” as involved in the homosexual lifestyle or cross-dressing.

“What is it that homosexual activists don’t want Michigan lawmakers to see?” Glenn asked.

“In the sad reality of enabling emotional trauma and delusion that comprises their stock in trade,” Glenn said, “it is not a joking matter to wonder if the Triangle Foundation’s wardrobe instructions will further traumatize or inhibit the emotionally disturbed men who claim they’re really women, who had every serious intent of wearing a dress to the state Capitol and using the women’s restrooms while they’re there. Is the Triangle Foundation asking ‘lobbying day’ participants to go back into the closet for mere political expedience?”

According to Triangle’s website, Wednesday’s “lobbying day” is sponsored by the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, Michigan Equality (a Lansing “gay rights” group), the Human Rights Campaign (purportedly the largest national “gay rights” group), ACLU-Michigan (which represents “gay rights” groups in court), the American Friends Services Committee’s Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Issues Program, Affirmations (a “gay and lesbian” community center in Ferndale), the Coalition for Adoption Rights for Everyone (which lobbies for “gay” adoption rights), the National Organization of Women-Michigan, and, of course, the Triangle Foundation.

“All these groups have something obviously in common,” Glenn observed. “But Triangle doesn’t want the people representing all these lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender activist groups to be ‘recognized’ or ‘labeled’ as a lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender activist group.”

The “lobbying day” dress code appeared Tuesday on Triangle’s website as follows:

“Due to the importance and sensitivity of this day, we ask that those planning to attend reflect their views and opinions in their dialogs (sic) with individuals and not with their attire. Items that may be a sign of your status as Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender or ally could distract from the message of the day. This legislation is for safe schools for all students, including those in our community. Lansing should recognize us as equal residents and not label us as Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender. We hope that you understand our request and accept that this is not an attempt to censor who we are, but to allow us to be seen as concerned citizens first.” http://www.tri.org/ssld.html

“Homosexual activists are trying to disguise who they are,” Glenn said, “just as they’re trying to disguise the real agenda behind this Trojan Horse ‘bullying’ legislation.”

“Since homosexual activists and their political allies oppose language that would simply protect all children from all bullying for all reasons, it’s clear that their real agenda is to use legitimate concern over student safety to sneak special rights based on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing into Michigan law for the first time,” he said. “And then to use that as a precedent to add special rights and protected status based on that unhealthy behavior to Michigan’s civil rights and hate crime laws, threatening the religious freedom and free speech rights of individuals and organizations who oppose homosexual activists’ political agenda.”

Last year, Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, attempted to amend the legislation to strike language segregating students into special “protected class” categories — including, for the first time ever in Michigan law, “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression” — and replace it with language prohibiting all bullying against all students for all reasons.”

House Democrats refused to even allow a vote on that amendment. The legislation was passed a year ago by the House and has since languished in the state Senate.

The Michigan Association of School Boards warns members not to include “sexual” orientation in school harassment or bullying policies: “Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term “sexual orientation” in their anti-harassment policies. ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class. He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.” (The Oakland Press, March 13, 2005: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/031305/edu_20050313006.shtml)

The Lansing State Journal editorially opposes the so-called “bullying” legislation: “A state law isn’t going to make school hallways bully free. …The most recent bills already have cleared the House and are awaiting action by the Senate. Their prospects are uncertain, though, as Republicans and ‘family values’ advocates are protesting the inclusion of ‘sexual orientation’ as one of the characteristics specifically mentioned in the bills. Michigan isn’t going to benefit right now from a battle over which characteristics deserve protection from bullies. It’s divisive and unnecessary. …Whenever the Legislature has taken up the bullying issue, the impression left is that local school districts and boards lack the interest to act. How can that be? …Do state lawmakers really think that school boards don’t care about protecting schoolchildren; that lawmakers in the state Capitol have a better grip on hallway happenings than parents and community members?” (April 17, 2007)

The Grand Rapids Press editorially opposes the so-called “bullying” legislation: “Proposed legislation in Lansing that would require schools to adopt a policy that prohibits bullying and harassment is well-intentioned but unnecessary. Lawmakers should reject it. Schools already have policies to combat bullying and effectively deal with those perpetrators who assault, harass or intimidate other students. …The Senate should realize the bully matter isn’t being overlooked by schools. Educators don’t need the state to take control.” (April 4, 2007)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *