|What is referenced in this story as a “radio commercial” is in fact our AFA-Michigan News Minute, a daily audio news feed we provide to Christian and other radio stations across the state, which air them free of charge. The “news minute” addressing Gov. Snyder and the Right to Work issue, illustrated by the campaign for Michigan’s Marriage Protection Amendment, is attached.
“(Gov. Rick Snyder, R-Michigan) told everyone he was all about getting a new budget and business tax in place and would not be diverted by ‘other’ issues. Well the budget is in place, as is the business tax, and here comes Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan. Letâ€™s just say Mr. G.G. is not a liberal…not by any stretch. And heâ€™s got an agenda as long as your arm of 15 issues that he wants the governor and GOP legislature to tackle.
…Mr. Glenn even launched some radio commercials sticking the Right to Work issue right in the governorâ€™s relentless positive action face. Recall Mr. Snyder thinks Right to Work is divisive and would pit business against labor in what could well be a nasty political bloodbath. Mr. Glenn and company appear to be saying, bring on the blood.”
FOX 2 DETROIT
Gary Glenn’s agenda for Rick Snyder
by Tim Skubick / FOX 2 Political Consultant
LANSING — Oh my, this could get mucho messy.
The ultra-conservative wing of the state GOP has been patiently marking time since January when the Rick Snyder juggernaut rolled into town.
The new governor told everyone he was all about getting a new budget and business tax in place and would not be diverted by â€œotherâ€ issues.
Well the budget is in place, as is the business tax, and here comes Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan. Letâ€™s just say Mr. G.G. is not a liberal…not by any stretch.
And heâ€™s got an agenda as long as your arm of 15 issues that he wants the governor and GOP legislature to tackle.
Try this on for size:
(1) prohibit state funding of any sex changes for prison inmates.
(2) prohibit use of classroom dollars to â€œpromote any form of sexual activity outside of marriage.”
(3) Halt any show of nudity during â€œdrama productionsâ€ at state universities.
(4) Cut off support to Planned Parenthood
(5) Make sure homosexual couples canâ€™t adopt children.
One could go on to list the other 10, but you generally get the idea here, right? By the way, none of those items were in the Snyder campaign blueprint to reinvent Michigan.
Obviously, thereâ€™s been a pent up demand to address some of those social wedge issues which the current governor has demonstrated little stomach to stomach.
Mr. Glenn even launched some radio commercials sticking the Right to Work issue right in the governorâ€™s relentless positive action face. Recall Mr. Snyder thinks Right to Work is divisive and would pit business against labor in what could well be a nasty political bloodbath.
Mr. Glenn and company appear to be saying, bring on the blood.
Wonder what blood-type the governor is?
|What are described in this article as “radio ads” are in fact just one issue of our AFA-Michigan News Minute, which is run daily, free of charge, by Christian and other radio stations across the state. The audio of this particular day’s version is attached.
“Gary Glenn says it is wrong for Christians and other employees to continue to be forced, under threat of being fired, to financially support labor unions such as the National Education Association and the AFL-CIO that support abortion on demand, the homosexual agenda, homosexual marriage, and transgender rights.”
Radio ads take on governor
Gov. Rick Snyder said the Right to Work issue is divisive and a new radio ad suggests, “it is not on his to-do list.” But the commercial goes on saying that Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan (AFAM) said “it should be.”
The ad is the first mass media effort to move the issue in the legislature despite the Governor’s stance.
The spot is sponsored by Glenn’s group and will air on radio stations in Lansing, Flint, Zeeland and Grand Rapids.
“Gary Glenn says it is wrong for Christians and other employees to continue to be forced, under threat of being fired, to financially support labor unions” such as the National Education Association and the AFL-CIO that support “abortion on demand, the homosexual agenda, homosexual marriage and transgender rights.”
The commercial points out that two-thirds of labor households in 2004 supported the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment,” yet their union contributions were used by the labor groups to fight the amendment the workers wanted.
The radio spot concludes, “The Right to Work law would protect Christians from being told to pay up or be fired.”
Glenn, by the way, is scheduled to appear on the Off the Record broadcast — http://wkar.org/offtherecord — this week.
Listen to the Radio Ad here.
|“Recruiting children? You bet we are. Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?”
Queerty columnist openly admits that so-called anti-bullying bills are a Trojan Horse propaganda ploy by which to promote homosexual behavior as safe and normal in our public schools.
In fact, medical research indicates that such behavior is a severe threat to both personal and public health, associated with a dramatically higher incidence of mental illness, eating disorders, substance abuse, syphilis and other STDs, serious life-threatening diseases such as cancer, hepatitis, and AIDS, and premature death by up to 20 years.
Homosexual columnist writes:
“We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. …The younger generation doesnâ€™t fear homosexuality as much because theyâ€™re exposed to fags on TV, online, and at school. And I donâ€™t know a single lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person who wants that to stop.
I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that itâ€™s OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak.
…I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality and there’s nothing wrong with that.
…(W)e do our opponents an even greater service when we trip all over ourselves promising not to mention queers in front of the kids when in fact weâ€™d love to. And because we hide from this very basic fact and treat it like something to be ashamed of, we end up with watered-down unemotional pleas for equality…
How about this? How about we accept that we want kids to think better about queers… That would at least be honest.”
|Please take a minute right now to e-mail Attorney General Bill Schuette and simply THANK him for taking this strong decisive action to stop a rogue state agency from forcing Michigan taxpayers to subsidize homosexual activity among state employees!
Family group applauds Schuette lawsuit to block taxpayer subsidy of state employees’ homosexual relationships
Calls on lawmakers to limit spousal-type benefits only to married employees, as Schuette bill attempted in 1998
LANSING, Mich. — In the face of an impending $1.8 billion deficit in the state budget, a statewide family values Friday applauded Attorney General Bill Schuette’s announced lawsuit to “protect taxpayers from being forced by the Michigan Civil Service Commission to fund yet another multi-million dollar expansion of employment benefits for government employees, the most recent driven by an obviously ideological fixation, no matter how much it costs, on forcing taxpayers to subsidize homosexual relationships that many taxpayers consider immoral and characterized by behavior that threatens both personal and public health.”
Gary Glenn, Midland, president of the American Family Association of Michigan and one of two co-authors of the Marriage Protection Amendment approved by voters in 2004, said:
“On behalf of the overwhelming majority of voters who approved Michigan’s Marriage Protection Amendment, we salute Attorney General Schuette for taking strong, decisive action to prevent a rogue state agency from recognizing and treating homosexual activity among government employees as something equal or similar to marriage. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize government employees’ homosexual relationships under any circumstance, but at a time when the state is facing a nearly two-billion dollar deficit, forcing taxpayers to spend an additional $11 million dollars to do so is particularly unconscionable.”
“When our state is already drowning in red ink, forcing taxpayers to fund new benefits for any new group of beneficiaries — but especially a group medically proven to be at severely elevated risk of substance abuse and expensive life-threatening diseases such as AIDS, cancer, and hepatitis — is all the more unthinkable and will further increase both the state budget deficit and the cost of health care.”
He pointed to a national homosexual activist group’s embarrassing experience with the cost of its own same-sex benefits plan. According to the Washington Blade, a “gay” advocacy newspaper in the nation’s capital, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force — which is critical of employers who cite cost in refusing to offer same-sex benefits — was forced in 2003 to cut back its own same-sex benefits plan, calling it “prohibitively expensive” and unsustainable. http://www.cnsnews.com/node/5503
“When the NGLTF’s unionized staff threatened to go public with a dispute over domestic partner benefits,” the Blade reported, “(executive director Lorri) Jean called for dropping a longstanding NGLTF policy of paying 100 percent of the health insurance premium for staff members’ domestic partners, saying the benefit was prohibitively expensive…(and)…a 100 percent benefit plan for domestic partners could not be sustained, Jean said, at a time when the group had a $500,000 debt.” (Washington Blade, March 7, 2003)
Glenn, one of two co-authors of the Marriage Protection Amendment overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2004, said that because of the scientifically proven social, financial, and health benefits of marriage between a man and a woman, the state should statutorily restrict spousal-type state employment benefits exclusively to married employees as an incentive to marry.
“Every study ever done proves that traditional marriage results in increased health and financial security for both men and women, and that their children are healthier, do better in school, and are less likely as teens to use drugs, get pregnant, or commit juvenile crime, all of which reduces the cost to taxpayers for law enforcement, social welfare, and other government programs,” Glenn said.
“Getting married is also the single biggest factor in avoiding or escaping poverty,” Glenn said, citing a study published five months ago by the Heritage Foundation which found that in Michigan, children of single mothers are more than six times more likely to live in poverty than children of married parents. http://www.heritage.org/Multimedia/InfoGraphic/2010/Marriage-Poverty-Charts/Marriage-and-Poverty-in-Michigan
“Rather than force taxpayers to subsidize unmarried relationships, Michigan should as a matter of fiscal policy alone reduce the size and expense of government by doing everything possible to encourage and incentivize traditional marriage,” he said. “That includes saving money by restricting tax-funded employment benefits exclusively to state employees who are married, specifically to reward and encourage employees to get married and stay married.”
“More marriage means less government, less government spending, and less of a burden on taxpayers,” he said.
Glenn noted that a pre-election poll by the Detroit Free Press in 2004 found that a larger percentage of the state’s population opposed tax-financed same-sex benefits for government employees than supported the amendment itself, which ended up passing with nearly 60 percent of the vote. (“Gay marriage ban headed for passage,” Detroit Free Press, Oct. 2, 2004)
Glenn said that the Civil Service Commission’s approved benefits plan, by drawing the eligibility requirements for such benefits so narrowly — with the express purpose being to cover the homosexual partners of state employees, advocates of the policy said, while excluding family members such as parents and siblings — the commission’s plan may have granted legal recognition of unmarried homosexual and heterosexual relationships as being “similar to” marriage, a step the state Supreme Court ruled in 2008 is prohibited by the amendment. Attesting to its agreement with Glenn’s views as a co-author as to the amendment’s intent, the court quoted or cited AFA-Michigan’s legal brief on the issue three times in its decision in Pride at Work (AFL-CIO) v. Granholm.
“As we made clear in public statements as far back as the ballot campaign for the amendment in 2004, we believe an unrestricted benefits policy that allows a state employee to cover anyone he chooses, including family members such as parents, siblings, or grandparents, probably would be constitutional since it obviously would not be based on treating the employee’s relationship as similar to a marriage,” he said. “But that’s not what the Civil Service Commission did.”
But there’s a big distinction between the question of constitutionality and whether such a plan is good public policy, Glenn said. AFA-Michigan would oppose such an unrestricted plan, even if constitutional, because it would increase the tax burden on Michigan families even more than the Civil Service Commission’s plan. Attorneys for the University of Michigan agreed in the Pride at Work case, arguing in court that because of the cost, the university should not be compelled to broadly offer benefits to any individual an employee chooses in order to be allowed to continue covering employees’ homosexual partners.
* Even if a court finds that the Civil Service Commission plan is allowed under the Marriage Protection Amendment, that doesn’t mean the state constitution requires such benefits be offered, Glenn said. Ideally, the state should instead enact legislation such as that Schuette himself introduced over a decade ago as a member of the state Senate, restricting taxpayer-financed state employment benefits only to the spouses of married employees, with the obvious effect of statutorily prohibiting the commission’s unmarried partner benefits plan in future collective bargaining agreements with state employees. Schuette’s legislation passed the Senate in 1998 but was not brought up for consideration by the House.
Metro Times, a Detroit newsweekly, reported in 1999: “State Sen. Bill Schuette, R-Midland, is pushing legislation prohibiting employees of state-funded entities from receiving domestic partner benefits. That legislation evolved from an earlier Schuette effort to target the extension of such benefits at Wayne State University, the University of Michigan and other institutions. The attorney general ruled that public colleges and universities could be barred from extending the benefits only if there was a law against it for all employees of entities receiving state funds. …Ginotti says the senator wants to stop the use of taxes to support benefits for unmarried partners because their bond isnâ€™t legally recognized.” http://www2.metrotimes.com/news/story.asp?id=10989
The Post newspaper at Ohio University reported in 1997: “When Michigan State University became the third Michigan university in September — preceded by Wayne State University and the University of Michigan — to grant such benefits, backlash arose from a state senator. Although the decision was supported by the MSU Board of Trustees after more than two years of research and debate, state Sen. Bill Schuette, R-Midland, created a plan to penalize universities for funding benefits to partners of gay and lesbian faculty and staff by not permitting them to use state money to pay for the benefits, according to the MSU State News. Phil Ginotte, Schuette’s spokesman, said the trustees made an unwise decision — ‘a mistake’ that will ‘resonate through the state,’ according to the Sept. 15 issue of the MSU State News.” (Oct. 27, 1997) http://www.thepost.ohiou.edu/archives/102797/partners.html
Glenn also dismissed arguments by homosexual activist groups and their political allies that the state must subsidize the homosexual and other unmarried partners of state employees in order to be competitive in hiring.
“Homosexual behavior is not a requirement or indicator of being among the best and brightest. The severe public health consequences alone prove that engaging in such behavior is neither the best or brightest decision, and taxpayers certainly shouldn’t be forced to pay for the medical consequences of such behavior.”
|â€Ž”While the path didnâ€™t run through Ann Arbor, as he had envisioned, Johnson said Godâ€™s path was much better than his. ‘The things I accomplished athletically at Boise State, I could have accomplished anywhere,’ he said. ‘But what I couldnâ€™t have gained was much more important — and thatâ€™s my lovely wife.’ Johnson said his wife has made him a better man and a better Christian.”
â€Ž”‘My challenge to you is, when the Lordâ€™s path deviates from yours, have the strength to follow,’ he said. Johnson was in Michigan to speak to the American Family Association of Michiganâ€™s annual banquet, which was held in Troy.”
Click here for pictures from the event.
|“AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn, one of two co-authors of the state’s Marriage Protection Amendment, said the group ‘is thrilled to welcome to Michigan a man whose performances on the field earned him a national spotlight, but whose values, testimony, and family values off the field are all the more worthy of our admiration.'”
â€Ž”When Johnson and his wife were married in the summer of 2007, armed bodyguards were required at the church in response to racially-motivated threats against the couple. Johnson is half white and half African-American, while Chrissy is white. ‘Before Boise State running back Ian Johnson married the girl he proposed to on national TV, the couple prayed to end prejudice,’ the Washington Post reported. Glenn said that’s a prayer his group shares.
…’We wish Ian success in his new career with the Lions, and we hope, as a result of our banquet, he and Chrissy will know they have a base of new fans here in Michigan, both black and white, who support them and deeply appreciate their Christian witness and the values they stand for,’ Glenn said.”
|“The American Family Association of Michigan also reached out to its members, asking them to voice support for Dixon and local leaders. In a message to members, AFA Michigan wrote that it saluted Dixonâ€™s ‘principled stand for family, faith and freedom’ and applauded city and county leaders for respecting her religious free speech rights.”
Thanks if you’re one of AFA-Michigan’s supporters who responded to our call to action in support of Crystal Dixon, as reported in this story.
|â€Ž”Two psychologists testified…that pedophilia is a ‘sexual orientation’ just like homosexuality or heterosexuality. …Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, said, ‘Pedophiles…are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.”
The North American Man Boy Love Association says current laws against child molesting violate their “civil right” to have sex with children and “discriminate” against them on the basis of their “sexual orientation.”
If marriage is radically redefined once to meet the demands of homosexual activist groups, demands will logically and inevitably follow that marriage be redefined again and again to meet the demands of the next special interest group. Polygamists (lawsuits have already been filed), then group marriage advocates (as University of Michigan professors advocate), then pedophiles.
Think that’ll never be seriously debated or considered? That’s what America thought about so-called homosexual “marriage” only a couple decades ago.
|“The Michigan House of Representatives is prepared to vote on a resolution which would overrule a January decision by the Michigan Civil Service Commission to provide partner benefits to state employees. Republicans say the move will cost $6 to $8 million in increased costs for the state.”
â€Ž”American Family Association of Michigan President Gary Glenn sent a letter to Republican leaders in the state asking them to reject the MCSC decision. But he went a step further and asked them to ask Bill Schuette, the GOP Attorney General, to determine if providing the benefits violated the stateâ€™s ‘Marriage Protection Amendment.’
That amendment was passed in 2004 by voters and defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman and disallows the recognition of any other ‘similar’ relationship. The last six words of the amendment â€” ‘or similar union for any purpose’ â€” led to a lengthy court battle in the state that ended with the Supreme Court ruling in 2008 that providing same-sex partner benefits violated that provision.”
|THE SOUTH END
Wayne State University
February 28, 2011
Obamaâ€™s DOMA stance causes mixed feelings
Some Michigan residents celebrate, others are critical
by Eric Skibbe and Isaac Elster / The South End
…”Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan and co-author of the stateâ€™s Marriage Protection Amendment, said Obamaâ€™s decision was mostly irrelevant in terms of its legal effect.
‘Neither side of this issue trusted or believed the Obama Administration when it previously purported to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court despite the presidentâ€™s stated support for repealing it,’ he said. ‘We certainly didnâ€™t trust or depend on an aggressively pro-homosexual-agenda administrationâ€™s half-hearted legal defense of one-man, one-woman marriage.’
Glenn also said whatever Obama said about the law is unlikely to sway any votes on the U.S. Supreme Court. However, he said the president still made the wrong decision.
‘DOMA — which Obama now declares illegitimate, indefensible and unconstitutional — was signed into law by his Democratic predecessor, Bill Clinton, after passing both houses of Congress with overwhelmingly bipartisan, veto-proof support,’ Glenn said. Glenn also said Obamaâ€™s position indicts the majority of Democrat voters — including Clinton, Vide President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senator Carl Levin, D-Mich. — who voted for DOMA.
…Glenn also said homosexual activists ‘have never had a bigger cheerleader in the White House’ than Obama, who supports various legislation that ‘combined pose the greatest single threat to religious freedom in America today.’
He said it was also notable that Obamaâ€™s stance is at odds with most African-Americansâ€™ for whom support of the classic Christian definition of marriage and opposition to homosexual behavior ‘is stronger…than among any other racial demographic of our citizenry.’â€