Anti-bullying legislation a 'Trojan horse' for gay rights

MIRS — “Anti-bullying legislation stalled in previous sessions as groups like the American Family Association of Michigan claimed it was a ‘Trojan horse’ for gay rights. …While SB 0137 was derided by Democrats and (homosexual activist group) Equality Michigan, AFAM applauded the bill.

‘This all-inclusive protection could have passed years ago had Democrats not insisted — as they still do today — on trying to use anti-bullying legislation as a Trojan Horse for specially protected group rights based on homosexual activity and other personal behavior or characteristics, an approach opposed not only by AFA-Michigan but by Bully Police USA,’ said AFAM President Gary Glenn.”

Michigan Senate may vote on anti-bullying bill Tuesday

MICHIGAN MESSENGER — “At the heart of the argument is a belief by Democrats and most advocates that an enumerated bill — which specifically lists protected classes — would be more effective in addressing bullying. However, Republicans and their allies, including Gary Glenn at the American Family Association of Michigan, argue enumeration does not protect every student and that it is also part of the ‘homosexual agenda.'”

Read more-

Gridlock over sexual orientation blocks state law that would outlaw bullying

WXYZ-TV — “The staunchest opponent to (homosexual activists’ anti-bullying) bill isn’t in the state legislature. He’s Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, a conservative Christian group that has the ear of many Republican legislators. Glenn fears that if the bill becomes law, it could lead to same-sex marriage or adoption in Michigan. Mentioning gay students in a bullying bill, he says, promotes a ‘homosexual lifestyle.’

View the video-

3-Year-Olds Branded “Racist,” “Homophobic” Put In Government Database

INFOWARS — “Schools are being pressured to report such incidents to authorities and face punishments for not doing so under anti-bullying policies. This is a clear example of how hate crime laws have brazenly been hijacked by the state to get children institutionalized on criminal databases at an early age. This is about the state dictating what your child can think and say – it’s the thought police on steroids.”

Read more-

"And now we live in a state that may ban sex change operations for prisoners"- Between the Lines

BETWEEN THE LINES — “When pressed with these basic questions – uh, why do you care so much about this (very) particular issue at this particular moment? – Rep. Hooker just said it’s what the American Family Association of Michigan wanted him to do. …This bizarre buffoonery by Bible-thumping bigots has no place in a state full of intelligent, reasonable and caring citizens.”

Read more-

Grand Rapids starts Prime Timers chapter for gay, bisexual men

GRAND RAPIDS PRESS — “Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, and an outspoken opponent of the proposed Holland ordinance, maintains any endorsement of homosexual behavior is wrong. …’We should encourage people instead to abandon such medically high-risk behavior so they have a greater chance of living long enough to be senior citizens,’ he said.”

Read more-

Saginaw County Democratic Party chairwoman resigns to lead state lawmakers 2012 campaigns

When Garnet Lewis ran for the state House from Midland County in 2008, homosexual activists boasted she’d be the first openly lesbian state representatives in state history. She lost. Now she’ll be running all Democratic legislative races, as homosexual activists further their takeover of the Democratic Party in Michigan.
Gary Glenn

Read the Saginaw News article

Associated Press — Census records 42 percent increase in number of Michigan households led by same-sex partners

“Still, the numbers suggest that less than 1 percent of Michigan’s 3.8 million households are run by same-sex couples… Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, said the real message from the census results is that gays make up such a small portion of the population that the increase of same-sex households is irrelevant. ‘It just makes the point all the more that public policy in this state should not be driven or dictated by such a tiny fringe minority of society,’ said Glenn.”


Traverse City, Michigan
August 18, 2011

Census records 42 percent increase in number of
Michigan households led by same-sex partners

by John Flesher, Associated Press

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — Five years after tying the knot with her female partner, Denise Brogan-Kator took great pleasure in describing herself as married when filling out a 2010 U.S. census questionnaire.

“It felt empowering … very authentic,” said Brogan-Kator, executive director of Equality Michigan, a gay rights advocacy group. “It felt like an acknowledgement of our existence.”

Michigan has 21,782 households led by same-sex couples, according to census data released Thursday. That’s a 42 percent increase over the 15,368 reported in the 2000 census, which experts say reflects a nationwide trend and growing acceptance of homosexuality and nontraditional family structures.

Still, the numbers suggest that less than 1 percent of Michigan’s 3.8 million households are run by same-sex couples, which advocates and experts say reflects continuing reluctance on the part of many gay and transgender people to go public.

According to the census, in 2010 there were 12,483 Michigan households led by female couples, a 55 percent increase over 8,075 a decade earlier. The number led by male couples rose 28 percent, from 7,293 to 9,299.

Although the census refers to such households as being led by “unmarried partners,” it does not explicitly describe them as gay, lesbian or transgender. Nor does it enable single people to describe their sexual orientation. That means the census does not measure the number of homosexual people in Michigan or nationally.

Later this year, the U.S. Census Bureau plans to release data showing how many same-sex couples described themselves as married. Although Michigan doesn’t recognize same-sex marriages, some of the state’s same-sex couples may have gotten married in states that do. Brogan-Kator and her spouse, Mary Kator, were married in Canada and now live in Milford.

The bureau said the 2000 and 2010 numbers weren’t entirely comparable because of technical differences in how they were processed. Still, demographers said there was clearly a significant increase in the number of same-sex couples reporting themselves as such.

“It definitely points out that things are changing a great deal,” said Kurt Metzger, director of Data Driven Detroit, a demographic research agency. “Obviously people are feeling much more comfortable to come out and couple up and identify themselves that way on the questionnaires.”
Brogan-Kator said outreach efforts by the government and gay rights groups were partly responsible for the higher numbers of same-sex couples counted in the 2010 census. But she also credited an increasingly tolerant society.

“The climate has changed in Michigan and around the country,” she said. “Ten years ago, gay and transgender people were still very much worried about physical safety, and being out was a big risk. We existed in roughly the same proportions that we exist today, but we were very careful about who we would say we existed to.”

Like the rest of the U.S., Michigan remains divided over gay rights issues. Fifteen communities around the state have adopted anti-discrimination ordinances, but gay marriage is banned under a constitutional amendment adopted in 2004.

Wayne County had the highest number of same-sex households with 3,841, up 18 percent from 3,255 a decade earlier. Oakland County’s total rose 50 percent, from 2,039 to 3,058, while Macomb County had a 62 percent jump, from 1,014 to 1,644.

Kent County went from 976 households to 1,484, up 52 percent. Saginaw County’s number was up by one-third, from 282 to 373. Grand Traverse County had a 70 percent increase, from 131 to 223. In the Upper Peninsula, Marquette County had 132 same-sex households last year, a 35 percent increase from 98 in 2000.

Metzger said the data, while almost certainly under-reporting the number of households led by same-sex partners, should convince government officials to pursue more gay-friendly policies — to promote economic growth as well as social justice.

“If we want to be seen as a cool state that attracts young, creative, educated people, we can’t just look at immigrants,” he said. “We have to be seen as attractive to the gay population.”

Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, said the real message from the census results is that gays make up such a small portion of the population that the increase of same-sex households is irrelevant.

“It just makes the point all the more that public policy in this state should not be driven or dictated by such a tiny fringe minority of society,” said Glenn, who is seeking the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate next year.–Census-Michigan-Same-Sex-Households/


Great information from AFA-Indiana

To AFA-Michigan supporters…

This letter from American Family Association of Indiana is so good on several points that I want to share it with you. Thanks as always for your support!
Glenn's signature


Dozens of Congressmen
Are Standing with Indiana

This week, 41 members of Congress signed on to a federal appeals court brief that defends Indiana state law preventing Hoosier tax dollars from going to subsidize the abortion industry.

The friend of the court brief from the American Center for Law and Justice follows an earlier brief from the Thomas Moore Law Center in which 60 state legislators signed on to defend the new law. The legal briefs are part of the state’s appeal of a lower court ruling by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, which put the new law on hold and restored tax funding to Planned Parenthood.

The ACLJ brief argues for Indiana’s right to set parameters for Medicaid recipients. They note, “Federal Medicaid statutes and regulations give States broad discretion to craft the rules applicable to their Medicaid programs. Congress left intact the States’ authority to determine what makes an entity qualified to provide Medicaid services, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(p)(1), while ensuring that Medicaid recipients may utilize any practitioner deemed to be qualified under State law, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(23). Since HEA 1210 does not limit a beneficiary’s ability to choose among providers that are deemed to be qualified, it is consistent with federal Medicaid law.”

This state’s rights argument has been mentioned in many news reports. Perhaps more interesting is another argument in the ACLJ brief that urges the 7th U.S. Court of Appeals to overturn the lower court decision. It attacks Planned Parenthood and the ACLU’s “novel claim that abortion providers have a constitutional right to perform abortions and receive public funds; if accepted, this argument would unduly restrict the policy discretion that Congress and state and local governments have to decide how to spend public funds.” Calling the abortion industry’s audacious claim to a constitutional right to our tax dollars “novel” is kind to say the least.

The ACLJ brief is signed by the following members of the U.S. House of Representatives:
Michele Bachmann, Larry Bucshon, Dan Burton, Francisco “Quico” Canseco, Michael Conaway, John Fleming, Bill Flores, Randy Forbes, Virginia Foxx, Trent Franks, Scott Garrett, Vicky Hartzler, Jeb Hensarling, Tim Huelskamp, Randy Hultgren, Lynn Jenkins, Bill Johnson, Walter Jones, Jim Jordan, Mike Kelly, Steve King, John Kline, Doug Lamborn, Jeff Landry, James Lankford, Robert Latta, Kenny Marchant, Thaddeus McCotter, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Jeff Miller, Alan Nunnelee, Ron Paul, Mike Pence, Joe Pitts, Mike Pompeo, Todd Rokita, Chris Smith, Lamar Smith, Marlin Stutzman, Glenn Thompson, and Todd Young.

The Term “Pro-Choice” May
Not Mean What We Assume

Speaking of abortion, a new poll from Gallup has some very interesting findings. The proponents of abortion often claim that most Americans are “pro-choice” when it comes to abortion. There are recent surveys challenging this assertion in terms of the self-identification between being pro-life or pro-choice. Even if most Americans are “pro-choice,” it probably doesn’t mean what you think or what abortion advocates imply.

The Gallup survey of “pro-choice” Americans actually finds that most of these people agree with pro-life Americans on nine significant areas. For example, 86% of “pro-choice” individuals favor informed consent legislation which gives women information about abortion and alternatives beforehand. Two-thirds (63%) of “pro-choice” Americans favor banning the grisly partial birth abortion procedure. Sixty-percent support parental consent laws for minors seeking an abortion. Half (52%) of “pro-choice” Americans want abortions to be made illegal after the second trimester and 79% want third trimester abortions outlawed. One major difference is that most (64%) “pro-choice” Americans support abortion as a means of birth control in the first trimester.

As noted in previous surveys, Gallup has also reconfirmed that those who attend regular religious services (“churchgoers”) are twice as likely to be pro-life compared to those who rarely or never attend church services.

The Tail Wagging the Dog

I had a media interview late last week in regard to new US Census Bureau data showing numbers homosexual households in Indiana. When asked if I was surprised at the numbers, I said yes, not at their large size, but at how that minority are given the disproportional political and cultural influence homosexuals wield.

I have similar numbers from the year prior to those the reporter cited, and they are revealing. (Keep in mind that a recent Gallup poll found that a majority of Americans mistakenly believe that 25% of the US population is homosexual or bi-sexual. In reality that number is less than 3%.)

In Indiana, based upon Census Bureau data released in April 2010, there were only 10,200 same-sex couples living together in Indiana. Contrast this with 1,251,500 married Hoosier couples and same-sex couples account for just three-tenths of one percent of the household population in Indiana. In state after state, this percentage is nearly the same. Nationally the percentage of same-sex couples compared to married households is only 0.4%.

Some would argue that if homosexuals currently living together and therefore most likely to marry are so few, what is the harm of un-defining marriage. (For all of their claims of needing to redefine marriage when given the chance to “marry” in Europe or in states like Massachusetts, relatively few homosexuals actually do so. Most reject marriage, raising questions about their claims of disadvantage, denied rights, property sharing difficulties and marriage inequality.)

The real question is if the numbers are so small, why disrupt society by further devaluing marriage, rewriting school curricula, limiting religious speech, closing faith-based charities and other problems associated with same-sex marriage just to appease a very vocal, yet small 0.3% of cohabiting population? What of other behaviors and lifestyle choices? Must marriage be redefined to accommodate them too?

Given the societal importance of marriage and the traditional family, discarding the logical time-tested boundaries of marriage to appease a vocal, and tiny special interest group when poll after poll shows most Americans want marriage to remain as it always has been truly is a radical notion.

One Reason Why the Tail
Can Wag the Dog So Easily

In light of the data above, a logical question one may ask is why is American culture so pro-gay and morally decadent in virtually every way imaginable? May I suggest that the one-in-four of Americans who identify themselves as evangelical Christians are not following the Biblical directive to be “salt and light.” A staggering majority, betwene 76% and 78%, of Americans still identify themselves a Christians.

Why, given such large demographic numbers, is the culture so hostile to basic traditional values, parents, children, faith, etc? There are several reasons for this problem. One of them was found in a survey of pastors from Your Church Magazine that I mentioned in a recent weekly AFA-IN e-mail. The survey found that more than half of the ministers (55%) surveyed admitted that they would not preach at all or only sparingly on certain subjects. Nearly four-in-ten (38%) listed politics as the top subject they would avoid. One-in-four said that they would not mention homosexuality. When it came to the issue of abortion, 18% said that they would not mention this subject from the pulpit. Nearly one-in-ten said that they would not mention the subject or doctrine of Hell.

It is not as though God does not have things to say about these subjects and the issues of the day as revealed in His Word. The primary reason cited for avoiding certain subjects was that it might negatively impact church attendance. Yet, if the pulpits of our nation are silent on the issues its congregants confront daily in news headlines and the culture, how can we expect folks to live counter-culturally rather than mirroring everything around them?

(By the way, I am very excited about a new book coming out in a few weeks from Hoosier talk show host, Peter Heck, precisely about this issue of being salt and light in the world and taking back the culture. You can learn more about his book here:

The church serves a role as the conscience of a nation, and unlike most government programs, faith changes lives from the inside out. Still, cultural change does not rest solely at the feet of the church. This is where groups like AFA of Indiana play a vital part. Your financial and prayer support of AFA-IN is always welcome and helpful. If you would like to stand with us, you can make a tax-deductible donation online or mail one to us at: PO Box 40307, Indianapolis, IN 46240.