|No coincidence: for the third time, Granholm issues
statement promoting homosexual activists’ political
agenda the day before a major Christian holiday
Family group: Granholm’s Good Friday call for homosexual bullying bill “insensitive…hypocritical”
LANSING, Mich. — Gov. Jennifer Granholm, D-Michigan, drew fire Saturday from a statewide family values group for once again using the occasion of a major Christian holiday to issue a public statement promoting a political agenda pushed by homosexual activists in the state.
Gary Glenn, Midland, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, said “the third time around, we no longer believe the governor’s timing is an accident or coincidence, or even just trying to bury her promotion of the homosexual agenda in the news when people aren’t paying attention. The ongoing pattern makes it obvious that the governor believes it’s appropriate, apparently maybe even funny, to intentionally issue statements promoting homosexual activists’ political agenda in conjunction with major Christian holidays, in the face of people whose sincere religious values are offended by that agenda.”
Friday — observed worldwide as Good Friday by Christians marking the day of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and then celebrating his resurrection two days later on Easter Sunday — Granholm issued a news release criticizing the Michigan Senate for failing to pass so-called “anti-bullying” legislation demanded by homosexual activist groups.
The legislation — rather than simply prohibit all bullying against all students for all reasons, no exceptions — would instead require public schools to first segregate students into special “protected class” categories including so-called “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” then dole out protection against bullying to students who are members of one of those special protected classes.
The Michigan Information and Research Service, a Lansing state capitol news service, Friday reported Granholm’s statement and noted that “a major sticking point to anti-bullying bills in the past has been language that mandates that any local school district policy include a specific prohibition on bullying based on a child’s sexual orientation. The inclusion of this language ruffles the feathers of the social right, which fears such provisions would force all school districts to embrace gay and lesbian lifestyles.”
Glenn accused Granholm of hypocrisy and “an ongoing pattern of timing that reflects a lack of respect and sensitivity to the values of millions of Christians in Michigan.”
“Aside from once again using a Christian holiday to promote her homosexual activist allies’ political agenda, the fact is that Jennifer Granholm could have signed a comprehensive all-inclusive anti-bullying bill into law years ago that would have prohibited all bullying against all students for all reasons, period,” Glenn said. “All she’s had to do — all she has to do now — is exert a little leadership and influence with her own party and political allies, and it would likely pass both houses unanimously.”
“Instead, she has stood silently, invisibly by, apparently waiting for another Christian holiday,” Glenn said, “while Democratic lawmakers blocked that simply-stated legislation year after year, refusing to consider anything other than the demands of homosexual activists whose ulterior motive is to use legitimate concern over bullying as a Trojan Horse to create special legal rights based specifically on homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.”
Glenn noted that in 2008, both state Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, and Senate Majority Floor Leader Alan Cropsey, R-Dewitt, proposed amending Democrats’ anti-bullying legislation to simply and directly prohibit all bullying against all students for all reasons, without segregating students into protected classes first as the basis of gaining such protections. Homosexual activists condemned their proposals, and Democrats in both houses refused to support them.
“That’s why it hasn’t passed, and won’t,” Glenn said. “It’s simple, governor. Drop homosexual activists’ political agenda out of the bill, directly or indirectly, and you could likely have an anti-bullying bill on your desk by the end of the month. If you don’t, it won’t be the state Senate’s fault, it’ll be because your political allies’ hidden agenda is more important to you than actually passing a bill to protect young people from bullying.”
Glenn noted the two prior occasions on which Granholm also timed the announcement of her support for policies promoted by homosexual activists with a major Christian holiday:
* In 2003, Granholm announced on Christmas Eve that she had issued an executive directive granting special “protected class” status to state employees involved in homosexual relationships. http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7-168-36898_36901-83560–,00.html
Glenn, in a guest opinion published by several state newspapers at the time, criticized the governor’s action and timing, saying she was attempting to “morally and legally equate homosexual behavior to race, ethnicity and religion. To Michigan families whose Christian faith teaches such behavior is wrong, her timing was a slap in the face.” He concluded by facetiously anticipating the timing of Granholm’s next statement promoting the homosexual agenda, saying, “No doubt she’ll announce that on Good Friday.” Glenn’s prediction finally came true seven years later.
* In 2007, the day before Thanksgiving, Granholm issued a news release announcing another new executive order by which she had established the same “protected class” status for male state employees who claim to suffer the delusion that they’re really women and demand to wear dresses to work and use the women’s restrooms, showers, and other public facilities. The Triangle Foundation, a leading homosexual activist group in the state, praised the announcement, as reported by the Associated Press on Thanksgiving Day. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312550,00.html
Glenn noted that on all three occasions on which Granholm, a professed Catholic, used a major Christian holiday as the backdrop for announcing her support for so-called “gay rights” measures, her actions were at odds with her own church’s teaching on the subject.
The Vatican in 1992, in a formal directive to bishops authored by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, stated:
“Recently, legislation has been proposed in various places which would make discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal. …Such initiatives, even where they seem more directed toward support of basic civil rights than condonement of homosexual activity or a homosexual lifestyle, may in fact have a negative impact on the family and society. …’Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder and evokes moral concern. …Including ‘homosexual orientation’ among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily bad to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights… The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality.” http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFHOMOL.HTM