Follow Us on Social Media!

Friday, September 15, 2017

Religious Right Takes Bathroom Fight Back to Schools after Defeat at Capitol

by Michael Barajas, staff writer for the Texas Observer. You can reach him on Twitter or at

The linked article above is highly biased in favor of LGBT goals; but if you read between the lines, we're winning a lot of ground.

Here are a few comments:

I don't know what Allan Parker had in mind when he told the Jenner story; but for me, it illustrates the unavoidable fact of biological gender despite the fantasies of transgenderism; i.e., when a trans-woman dies, the corpse that's left is forensically male--- end of story.

The Texas House did NOT "refuse to pass" the Texas "bathroom."  Joe Straus assigned the bill to a committee with a hostile chairman who refused to let the bill come up for a vote.

Joe Straus' "I don't want the suicide of a single Texan on my hand (sic)," is without any scientific evidence and caves in to the emotional blackmail that manipulative people often use. If avoiding suicide is the goal, then NOT giving into the blackmail is clearly the best path since science DOES indicate people who fully "transition" to the opposite gender have a suicide rate 20 times normal.

Bullying of LGBT people is a minuscule portion of the bullying problem in schools, most of which is about body size.  LGBT activists focus on bullying because it allows them to sidestep laws that would otherwise prevent them from introducing students to highly sexualized material put out by the Human Rights Campaign and other bad actors.

The argument that the change in SAISD policies merely brings SAISD in line with the school systems of comparable cities explains and justifies the presence of opponents from outside the District in that the introduction of transgenderism into school policies in one district is a threat to parents and children in all districts.

Barajas' description of Sharon Armke's distress over an instance of transgenderism left out the most important parts, which were (1) the source of the child's desire to be a girl (i.e., feeling unloved as a boy) and (2) how easy it would have been to steer him in the right direction if not for the influence of transgender ideology on the mother. 

All the talk of safety in the article is exquisitely sensitive to a tiny percentage of the school population in flagrant disregard to the safety of a huge percentage of that population.  Ms. Hudgens passed out a two-page listing of actual cases. 

In general, the article uses "LGBT rights" as if such rights actually exist.  They do not.  SAISD and the other districts that have preceded SAISD in adding transgenderism to local policies are establishing a protected class not found in existing law and against the wishes of the majority of Texans.

SAISD, like all public school districts, has a "predatory monopoly" over education within in its boundaries and is using that monopoly to establish policies that would guarantee the collapse of the Districts student population if parents were free to choose where they send their children to school.  

In the end, LGBT activism is not compatible with freedom of speech, religion, association, conscience, commerce, etc., etc.  LGBT ideology is one of the most oppressive influences in all of American life.



A very illuminating article in relationship to the anonymity of gay sex and how lack of sex between gay "spouses" contributes to persistence of the relationship. In other words, gay sex is an individual thing, not a personal thing and that fact illuminates the oddities of gay relationships.
San Antonio Independent School District Board Meeting
11 Sep 2017

For everyone's convenience, here is a 45-minute clip that excerpts all of the testimonies presented at the 11 September San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) for and against addition of transgenderism to local SAISD policies. You can download it by clicking on the following link, and once the video appears in a browser window, by right clicking on the video image and selecting "save as":

A Conservative Community's Response to San Antonio ISD's Policy Change

Religious Right Takes Bathroom Fight Back to Schools after Defeat at Capitol

After failing to pass a “bathroom bill” at the Legislature, religious-right conservatives target LGBT-inclusive policies at schools.

Allan Parker, Justice Foundation president, speaks to a church in 2015.  YOUTUBE/HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=SUSSJ-U9CHW
On Monday, Allan Parker stood outside the San Antonio Independent School District’s David G. Burnet Center and asked everyone gathered to imagine Caitlyn Jenner’s dead body. 

Not that Parker wants Jenner dead or anything. But, he clarified, just think of how befuddled police would be by the discovery of her corpse. Parker, a lawyer and president of the San Antonio-based Christian legal advocacy group The Justice Foundation, mused: “Bruce Jenner, who calls himself Caitlyn Jenner, would be identified as a white male in the police report by his DNA. That’s what he is. He is not a woman. He’s a white male dressing as a woman and using a woman’s name.”
What any of that has to do with the San Antonio school district, which conducts its board meetings inside the Burnet Center, underscores the religious-right fears that animated Texas’ recent legislative season.
James Armke (left) drove from Dripping Springs to protest SAISD’s new LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination policy at the district’s September 11, 2017 board meeting.  MICHAEL BARAJAS

Lawmakers this year proposed no fewer than two dozen bills aimed at restricting the rights of LGBT Texans. In June, Governor Greg Abbott signed into law a measurethat critics say allows private, religious-based adoption agencies to turn away LGBT parents. A so-called bathroom bill to police public restroom access for transgender Texans became a defining issue in the Legislature, but with overwhelming opposition from schools, police officials and big business leaders, the more moderate House refused to pass it. As House Speaker Joe Straus told the New Yorker’s Lawrence Wright, “I don’t want the suicide of a single Texan on my hand.” 

Despite, or perhaps because of, that defeat, Parker and other activists are still hunting for bathroom battles. It makes sense they’d look for them in schools. After conservative Christian groups such as Texas Values killed LGBT protections in Houston with the rallying cry “No Men in Women’s Restrooms” in 2015, they zeroed in on schools with trans-inclusive policies. When Fort Worth ISD issues guidelines for faculty on navigating gender issues, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick demanded that the superintendent resign and called the conflict a “modern day come-and-take-it moment.”
On Monday, Parker and others said they weren’t protesting trans-inclusive bathroom policies but rather six words — “sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression” — that the SAISD board added to its existing non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies last month. Parker called it “a blunt legal instrument to introduce transgenderism to all the children in the district.”
Ruby Polanco, a senior at SAISD’s Young Women’s Leadership Academy, led the charge to update the district’s non-discrimination policy.  MICHAEL BARAJAS
But Ruby Polanco, a senior from the district’s Young Women’s Leadership Academy who led a petition to update the policy, says the change was to protect students, teachers and staff from being bullied or fired because of who they are. She wanted SAISD to conform with other large districts across the state in cities like Houston and Austin, which have for years had LGBT-inclusive policies. Polanco told the board that the other side “pushed fear, lies and their politicized agenda.” 

Patti Radle, president of the SAISD board, began Monday’s meeting by warning everyone that trustees weren’t used to standing-room-only crowds, pleading with them to be respectful at the mic. Then someone tried to shout her down as she explained that the district’s new non-discrimination policy doesn’t affect restroom access. As activists got up to speak, some insisted the new policy was a kind of anti-bathroom bill in disguise that would “allow men in women’s restrooms” across the district. Others waved signs declaring “Our Children Are Not SAISD Property.” It’s unclear if any of them actually have children in the district. (I couldn’t find anyone who did, but one woman says her grandchildren “will be in SAISD” someday.) Some of the protesters told me they didn’t live in San Antonio. 

Like Sharon Armke of Dripping Springs. “I feel like the children are being recruited into the gay community,” she told the Observer. Non-discrimination policies that ensure fair treatment of LGBT students “will lead to brainwashing and child abuse,” she declared. “It will normalize these kinds of ideas and force kids to think it’s OK.” Armke says she got involved with Texas Values when the group descended on Dripping Springs ISD last year after the district started letting a third-grade trans girl use the girls’ bathroom at her school. Tears welled up in Armke’s eyes when she talked about “poor boys who grow their hair out, start wearing a dress, and become fully brainwashed.” 

SAISD isn’t the only Texas school district where Christian conservatives are fighting LGBT-friendly policies. A group calling itself Concerned Parents of Austin claimed a sort-of victory last month when they announced that Austin ISD was doing away with the Human Rights Campaign’s training program for LGBT-inclusive schools, which has already been taught to staff at 24 AISD campuses at last count. Caryl Ayala, an AISD teacher of 11 years, says she quit her job at the district last year because of the training.

“It really normalizes transgenderism and homosexuality,” she told the Observer. The group’s website informs readers about the “sex ed/LGBT agenda” and warns that “the sexual revolution is now entering our preschools and kindergartens.” AISD disputes that its new diversity training, which the district calls All Are Welcome and plans to roll out this spring, is a departure from the Human Rights Campaign curriculum. In an email, AISD spokesperson Tiffany Young called it “an expanded program … with the ultimate goal of providing a safe and inclusive learning environment for all students and families.” 

Ayala and her group still consider it a win, even though they don’t think it goes nearly far enough. Ayala told the Observer she thinks anything that creates a learning environment that “normalizes an LGBT lifestyle” is inappropriate. “You don’t have to be a parent of faith to believe that you should be in charge of what your child learns at school.”
Outside SAISD’s board meeting, Texas Values’ policy analyst, Nicole Hudgens, blamed the raucous display on moderate Republicans in the Texas House. She insisted all of this could have been avoided had the Legislature just given them their bathroom bill. “This could have been stopped by Speaker Straus,” she said. 
Michael Barajas is a staff writer covering civil rights for the Observer. You can reach him on Twitter or at

Friday, September 8, 2017

The LGBTQ Agenda & Comprehensive Sex Ed in Austin ISD

MassResistance Update
Pro-family activism

"In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
Like us on
Follow us on
Just posted on the MassResistance website:
Includes frightening new material from Freedom of Information Act requests. Parents stand tall, not intimidated by LGBT harassment. See VIDEOS of presentation. (You'll learn a lot!) More
The three presenters taking questions - many from hostile LGBT activists - after the formal presentation. They stood their ground wonderfully!

Help us continue our work!
MassResistance fights to protect parents and families across America and overseas from the radical agendas. We depend on people like you for financial support.
Help us continue our critical work. Donate to MassResistance
Better yet - become a monthly donor (email us to get set up)

Donations can also be mailed to: MassResistance, PO Box 1612, Waltham, MA 02454
ALL donations are confidential. MassResistance does not sell or lend any of its lists.

Contact us if you want to get involved!

For all recent posts see our website.

[If you are on this list by mistake, or do not want to get our email alerts, please accept our apologies. Please call us at MassResistance at 781-890-6001 or email us back with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line, and we'll immediately take you off the list. We've tried to only include people who've contacted us at some point or otherwise indicated they would like to hear from us.] 

Also, if this is being forwarded to you and you want to be on our primary list, sign up for email alerts here! 

Wednesday, August 23, 2017

Wake Up Austin ISD Parents!

Reno, Nevada parents kick out a sex ed program similar to Welcoming Schools:

Outcry From Parents Forces School to Scrap Sex-Ed Plans and Keep Abstinence Program Rita Diller   Aug 23, 2017   Reno, NV    
Planned Parenthood’s basic operating plan is very straightforward.
1. It installs sex education programs in schools.
2. These sex ed programs then create a demand for birth control among teens.
3. The birth control fails, which then leads to abortions.
Planned Parenthood makes money at each step in this process.
Planned Parenthood and its cohorts have developed a document called the National Sexuality Education Standards. These “standards” are not part of Common Core or any other national program. Rather, they are a horrible set of ideas intended to teach youth about sex, and are being pushed throughout the country. It is not surprising that responsible parents throughout the United States are fighting to keep these sex ed programs out of schools.
One such battle is currently raging in Reno, Nevada, where a document put together by Advocates for Youth (an organization originally called the Center for Population Options) was used to create a new sex program called SHARE. The proposed SHARE program is intended to replace an abstinence-only program in the schools and has met heavy resistance. The Washoe County School District formed a committee to recommend a new program and SHARE was its recommendation.
According to reports in the Reno Gazette-Journal, the committee’s proposed curriculum, which covered a wide array of topics ranging from respect to safe sex practices, was criticized for straying from the currently taught abstinence-only curriculum and interjecting “progressive ideals” surrounding a person’s sexuality, among other things. Major sticking points centered around topics that some community members felt were broached too early in a child’s life or should be left to a parent’s discretion. For instance, drafts of the proposed curriculum referenced vaginal, anal, and oral sex as early as the 6th grade.
The outcry from parents and other members of the community was so strong that the school district had no choice but to cancel plans to implement the SHARE program. The current abstinence-only program will continue being presented for the 2017–2018 school year.
The director of curriculum for the school district said: “We hoped for lots of input and we hoped for community involvement, but we didn’t anticipate the anger that we saw.”
Congratulations to the parents in the Washoe County School District for getting angry. As Planned Parenthood, Advocates for Youth, SIECUS, and others try to push these National Sexuality Education Standards on our children across the country, we must all get angry.
Our children’s lives, health, and souls are at stake. Let us all emulate the parents in Reno and refuse to allow these programs anywhere near our children. Note: Rita Diller is the national director of American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood Project.

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

What Doctors Tell Kids Behind Closed Doors

What Doctors Tell Kids Behind Closed Doors
Linda Harvey,
Friends of ours related a chilling incident that happened to their teen son. 

Visiting a family physician for a school sports’ physical, the boy was asked by the doctor, ”So, are you attracted to girls, to boys, or both?”

Stunned, the boy replied, “To girls,” and later recounted this exchange to his parents.

It’s becoming standard medical practice to approach homosexuality and bisexuality as normal.

And it’s common for adolescent patients to be counseled separately from parents during an office visit so a private conversation can occur about sexual practices, contraception, condoms and other “needs.”

Why this elitist social engineering of other people’s children? Parental control can be a child’s enemy, so the thinking goes, sometimes motivated by ignorance, fear and repression. Child emancipation/separation tactics are being pushed everywhere in medicine, as they are in public education.

“They” know what’s best for your kids.

Highly-educated professionals in a healing occupation who should know better sometimes discourage children from staying close to the people who care the most about them in the whole world. They often have contempt for traditional family values that may motivate a teen to remain responsibly abstinent until marriage. 

Why keep the parents in the dark about medical advice? Friends of ours related a chilling incident that happened to their teen son.
Visiting a family physician for a school sports physical, the boy was asked by the doctor, “So, are you attracted to girls, to boys, or both?”
Stunned, the boy replied, “To girls,” and later recounted this exchange to his parents.
It’s becoming standard medical practice to approach homosexuality and bisexuality as normal.
And it’s common for adolescent patients to be counseled separately from parents during an office visit so a private conversation can occur about sexual practices, contraception, condoms and other “needs.”
Why this elitist social engineering of other people’s children? Parental control can be a child’s enemy, so the thinking goes, sometimes motivated by ignorance, fear and repression. Child emancipation/separation tactics are being pushed everywhere in medicine, as they are in public education.
“They” know what’s best for your kids.
Highly educated professionals in a healing occupation who should know better sometimes discourage children from staying close to the people who care the most about them. They often have contempt for traditional family values that may motivate a teen to remain responsibly abstinent until marriage.
Why keep the parents in the dark about medical advice?
Because some believe exaggerated tales of child abuse or conflict over the adolescent’s budding sexuality and parental boundaries. Schools behave this way as well, with numerous incidents recounted of children directed to abortion clinics and pro-homosexual counselors and groups without parental knowledge.
It’s a busybody mentality wedded to the ethic of individual freedom, even for younger children before they reach the natural balance provided by maturity. That maturity also corresponds – or did until recent years – to legal restrictions as well.
Leftists are willing, even eager to smash boundaries, including age-of-consent laws. They believe they are entitled to advise your children on intimate and life-changing matters without your input.
When I was a young teacher and a committed social liberal volunteering at Planned Parenthood, I told several eighth-grade girl students who asked me how to obtain contraception without a parent’s knowledge.
I am terribly ashamed of this chapter in my past and confess right now to the Lord how sorry I am.
I never learned the results of my irresponsible guidance, but the reality is, such educational or medical advice can be terribly destructive.
I recently interviewed Dr. Michelle Cretella, president of the American College of Pediatricians, on my Ohio radio show. When questioned about gender dysphoria in children, she made a very chilling point – that current medical protocols have raced beyond any science to back them up.
In other words, children and teens are guinea pigs, being administered potent, life-changing drugs and steered down Mengelian paths by physicians at some of the top children’s medical centers in the nation who cater to radical sexual politics, not to empirical evidence that supports such treatment.
Dr. Cretella’s courageous claim that aiding a child in gender “transition” is “child abuse” is being disputed by an Australian study, but tellingly, the researchers fail to make a scientific case for their challenge.
One organization famous for ignoring scientific truth is Planned Parenthood, whose new guidelines for parents of preschoolers got a lot of publicity recently. We should teach children that their genitals do not determine their gender, they claim. The abortion giant is now also in the hormone-treatment business.
One commentator, S.E. Cupp, said this about the PP advice: “Of all the things it is – absurd, irresponsible, pretentious – one thing it definitely is not is scientific.”
The medically accepted age at which minors can give consent is decreasing rapidly. In some states, the law is explicit. Others, not so much.
The Guttmacher Institute, established as a research arm of Planned Parenthood, summarizes the liberalization of consent, which they view positively:
“The legal ability of minors to consent to a range of sensitive health care services – including sexual and reproductive health care, mental health services and alcohol and drug abuse treatment – has expanded dramatically over the past 30 years. This trend reflects the recognition that, while parental involvement in minors’ health care decisions is desirable, many minors will not avail themselves of important services if they are forced to involve their parents. … In most cases, state consent laws apply to all minors age 12 and older. In some cases, however, states allow only certain groups of minors – such as those who are married, pregnant or already parents – to consent. ”
Yes, the excuse that “teens won’t report problems” is used everywhere to legitimize the left’s sexual agenda. The results speak for themselves.
Some states remain silent on whether a minor can receive contraception without parental consent – Ohio, for instance. So what happens? Clinics and physicians probably do whatever they want. And Title X clinics – like Planned Parenthood – will keep a teen’s visit “confidential.”
But the trend toward medical lawlessness and mythology is understandable once you look at people in key leadership posts. Take, for instance, Dr. Rachel Levine in Pennsylvania, the state’s physician general. “She” was actually born a “he.” And he is not alone.
In Virginia, Dr. Marissa Levine is the state’s commissioner of health. It’s unclear if these two are related. But what is clear is “Marissa” is a guy named Mark who identifies now as a woman.
With leadership so foundationally compromised, why are we surprised when sodomy is sold in private exam rooms to teen boys and grade school children are given puberty blockers by pediatric “experts”?
Katherine Kersten in The Weekly Standard said it this way: “In short: The use of sex-reassignment treatments in children amounts to a massive, uncontrolled experiment.”
I would submit that the same description applies to the normalization of homosexuality and promiscuity in adolescents.
And educators, doctors and public health professionals should worry about angry parents at the door today, confronting the flagrant abuse of their children.
They also should worry about facing a much more daunting Authority sometime in the future. And He will not be smiling.


Sunday, August 13, 2017

Robert Lopez's report on meeting in Austin

Concerned Parents of Austin, which includes some Mass Resistance members, held a meeting at a public library in Austin on August 12, to discuss what is being introduced in Austin schools. Caryl Ayala, Jen Delgado, and Debbie Simons gave excellent Powerpoint presentations on the harmful things going on in Austin schools. The slides are available and full of pertinent information. A group of people attended who claimed they were affiliated with the LGBT community. I was there and witnessed first hand the way these "pro-LGBT" people conducted themselves in the setting of a public education discussion.

I've spent decades surrounded by gay & lesbian people. Obviously not all gays act like jerks. Many of them are nice and wonderful friends & family. These folks who attended represent the worst of them-but they also represent the slice of LGBT culture that will be forced on kids through programs like Welcoming Schools. They demonstrate why the mental health profession classified homosexuality as a mental illness for so many decades prior to the 1970s. Social stigma and prejudice aside, there are many behaviors rooted in dysfunction, mental illness, and emotional abuse, which are so predominant in the LGBT culture that people engaging in such conduct think it's normal and think people who find it abnormal have something wrong with them.

You can see very clearly how the abusive, mentally ill behaviors rampant in gay life worked their way into programs like Welcoming Schools, which seem to coach children to find grooming, ritual shaming, aggression, ganging up, peer pressure, hypersexualization, gossip, sarcasm, and emotional cruelty as normal. 

I was actually mortified by the way they acted yesterday. Their conduct showed exactly why these people & their allies have no place in school whatsoever. They engaged in aggressive bullying and mental abuse in front of us, mocking people's experiences, ganging up on people, forcing false narratives, shutting down learning, sexualizing people unfairly. They mocked people's credentials, couldn't understand or evaluate sources of information, couldn't focus on one subject, and violated the basic norms of academic behavior. They interrupted people and appealed to social ostracism. Plus many of them were threatening to dox people and record them saying things they didn't like.

They can't deal with their own history or intellectual origins. They erupted in rage at passages from Alfred Kinsey's 1948 book.

At the mention of HIV infections for kids they erupted in laughter. How is that funny? At the mention of grooming they had contemptuous outbursts. Three of the most vocal women told me in a ridiculous discussion afterwards that they believed nobody is pressured to come out as gay, which is a denial of outing and grooming & the history of both forms of abuse in the gay community. It shows either willful ignorance or outright deception about the vicious treatment and legal harassment currently conducted against people who come out as gay and then later go back on that and live out a straight or celibate lifestyle. The LGBT objectors at the meeting showed no concern for kids being pressured to have sex or shamed for being virgins, which flies in the face of an enormous controversy currently raging about Title IX. One woman said, "consent is a very easy topic," which is in fact not what we see with the massive numbers of schools embroiled in Title IX lawsuits. When I mentioned molestation they actually said, "look, if you can't deal with who you are." I responded, "That's bullying-you're bullying me." Her friend turned and said, "don't yell at my friend," when her friend had been raising her voice at me.

They claimed repeatedly that children can be homosexual at ages as young as four, yet they claimed that this wasn't "about sex." The logical fallacy that you can discuss "being gay" without alluding to sex is utterly dangerous. It's the style of predators. It's basically saying that you can get vulnerable people comfortable with the identity of homosexuality without them actually realizing that you intend to accustom them to having their anus traumatized and decades of their life spent in a community with precisely this kind of behavior. The two lesbians with whom I spoke also demonstrated that they were seasoned at predatory behavior. When I discussed concerns that statistics on bullying used to include "insinuating or starting rumors that someone is gay" but I don't see that anymore, they said, "if they're told there's nothing wrong with being gay, then there wouldn't be anything wrong with insinuating that someone's gay." I responded, "if that activity does not make them happy, it's harmful to tell the child they're gay." They said, "literally nobody is forcing people to have gay sex." They either have no clue about the high percentage of boys who are molested by men, or they think this isn't molestation.

This is terrifying.

The ones who feigned concern and tried to appear civil were the worst because they were engaging in the kind of emotional aggression that's rampant in the gay community. Abusers try to draw someone close and then humiliate them publicly when it will cause the most harm. The film Mean Girls captured it most iconically.

On the scholarly side, their behavior shows the death of academic inquiry. One woman said she had four daughters in the Austin school system and she wanted all her girls to be taught about vulvas and penises at young ages. She demanded proof that sex ed led to "society's downfall." I stepped in and answered her that cause and effect are difficult to establish when there are so many factors like pornography and we're talking about a massive human population reacting to complex sexualities. After saying she didn't care about "feelings" she responded by saying "I went to Catholic school in the 1980s and if you don't think these problems existed then" to which I answered "but there's data. These are statistics." They then proceeded to interrupt and claim that the data came from an illegitimate source, then had nothing to say when the data came from US federal agencies under Obama.

I was mortified by the whole event because I spent decades immersed in that community, surrounded by abusers and molesters who function precisely this way. They draw you into manipulative arguments and constantly misrepresent what you say. One woman kept saying, "we just want to show kids that gays exist and it's okay," when:

1) Schools don't exist for therapy sessions
2) Little kids aren't gay
3) Gay is a sexual behavior and it's not as simple as saying it's "okay"
4) We're not trying to force people not to talk about gayness in their homes, but they're trying to force everyone to talk about gayness in kindergarten.

They say they want to talk about gayness but then they punish anyone whose information (never mind viewpoint) does not exalt their specific and wildly misinformed bias about sexuality. I suspect one reason they want to bring up gayness all the time, especially around children, is that they experience sadistic pleasure in making people uncomfortable and intimidating people into saying things that they do not believe. It is a wonderful form of control to keep the focus set on an area where others are subject to their powers of veto, retaliation, and discipline.

Tragically, some of the people engaging in anti-academic misbehavior identified themselves as educators. One woman came claiming she was a librarian who loudly interrupted presenters. Despite being told repeatedly that questions would come at the end she kept blurting out loud irrelevant questions, one being "what is the source for that?" referring to a book with over 1,000 footnotes. This is a librarian? She doesn't understand how to remain quiet and she doesn't understand that a scholarly monograph has many sources, not just one? Later she came up to me to ask, "where are you a professor and what do you teach?" I told her. She scowled, "that explains a lot," and rudely walked away. I had done nothing to treat her rudely whatsoever. But this is the kind of woman who's running a library for little kids and dealing with their parents? The woman should not be allowed to run a library if she will encourage bullying, social shame, and stupidity in the realm she oversees-research! She also insisted that having pornographic books in a library accessible to kindergartners was harmless because "we are not censors." So taxpayers should pay her salary and give her a fund to buy dirty books and nobody should expect that she dispense of the books responsibly.

AISD has a lot of problems.

They are completely dishonest about the kinds of bullying that accompany homosexual subculture. The outing, the pressure, the grooming, the false claims that if you're uncomfortable with it you're "not able to accept yourself," the victim-blaming (they mocked someone who said he'd been molested), the constant use of peer pressure and embarrassment (two women in the back said "a majority of people in this room think you are wrong") -- these are all behaviors that are as damaging as the worst kinds of social abuse and make kids nervous, insecure, and likely to make poor sexual decisions. These are all behaviors that will not be diminished through Welcoming Schools or any other kind of pro-LGBT curriculum in existence. These are all behaviors we saw coming from people who champion and implement the policy.

All of them totally avoided the evidence Caryl Ayala provided of racism in the Welcoming Schools program, which was caught in an email requested through FOIA saying there was a problem with schools that have "too high of a Hispanic population."

These are bad for schools.

Stop these people. Texas must stop these people!

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

These are the people who want to talk to your kids, Part 1

You know the old saying: "Burn me once, shame on you; burn me twice, shame on me."

In the case of the LGBT lobby and children, we have to add: "burn me fifty times, shame on me and everyone who ever left me alone with you."

Currently in Texas the debate rages about what to do with SB3, something proposed that deals with transgender bathroom access. It's also much bigger than just the "bathroom bill," because school districts all over Texas are grappling with stealth efforts by LGBT activists to transform what students actually learn. The Human Rights Campaign is pushing "Welcoming Schools" on children as young as four or five, and they are not the only ones attempting to replace standard arithmetic, reading, writing, and science, with shamelessly inappropriate curriculum about homosexuality, transgenderism, and political issues such as same-sex marriage or gay parenting.

Needless to say, children at these impressionable and vulnerable stages are not equipped to receive this instruction. The instruction itself is improper since much of what these activists claim is false (for instance, male-male intercourse is not benign and is linked to a plethora of deadly diseases.) The motives are even falser. The LGBT lobby is convinced, largely based on their own memories of their particular childhoods, that children are hardwired and destined to become LGBT at very young ages. All the science we have available to us flies in the face of this, but for some reason LGBT activists find the "born this way" claim their most crucial. Because they think four-year-olds are already programmed naturally to be LGBT one day, the activists think it's perfectly logical and helpful to overwhelm them with information about homosexuality and transgenderism when they're toddlers, as a way of making the inevitable transition easier and less painful for those who are going to be "coming out" in a few years anyway. 

Cultural history and science both reflect a reality horrendously at odds with the LGBT worldview. Regardless of the vehemence with which many gay activists swear they "knew for sure" they were gay from early childhood, studies show that sexuality is fluid and fluctuating, existing on a spectrum. The hormonal turbulence of adolescence and slow development of the frontal lobe of the brain are linked to the consistent discovery that children's sexual orientation is not clear or predictable, with many children who claim gayness at an early age saying, by their late twenties, that their homosexual feelings receded and gave way to heterosexual impulses. 

Even if we were to accept the false claim that children are hardwired from early on for LGBT or non-LGBT destinies, there remains the stubborn reality that health outcomes are poor for children who rush into LGBT identity and activity in their teens or earlier. Sexual activity is emotionally turbulent for anyone when they are young, unprepared for the consequences of intercourse, and unable to survive on their own. When you are dependent on your parents, your parents have a right and duty to intervene if you are rushing down a dangerous path or consorting with bad influences, whether you appreciate that intervention during adolescence or not. So rushing into sex prior to financial independence is a surefire way to increase the risks of a standoff with parents. When you add to this problem the heavy-duty complications of LGBT lifestyle, you venture into a danger zone. While it is copiously depicted in pornography, anal sex is a complex undertaking with a massive margin of error. Because LGBT "youth" exist as a small minority among their peers, they are often going to drift into sexual relations with older members of the LGBT community, leaving them open to predatory behavior and exposing them to the perilous social interactions of the adult LGBT world, where high rates of addiction, alcoholism, eating disorders, domestic violence, assault, and other problems do not mix well with the instability of adolescence.

To teach children about LGBT life is, in most cases, to introduce and suggest it to them at a time when they shouldn't be encouraged to jump into it. But let's say we want to teach kids about this sexual content at a young age to prepare them for the topsy-turvy world out there. The curriculum put forward by Welcoming Schools and other gay-affirming educational groups is not the right way to bring this topic to kids. It is blatantly false, presenting LGBT life as untroubled and joyful. It equates all kinds of intercourse, glossing over the hygienic and epidemiological problems that afflict anal sex in particular. It romanticizes homes, relationships, friendships, and social circles tied to LGBT activities, all but coaxing the children to rush into those milieus expecting happiness and sunshine.

One problem is that this material should never be taught to minors in school at all. But a bigger problem is who is pushing this material right now.

These are the same people who've burned us a thousand times before, as I will elaborate in a series of posts on "These are the people who want to talk to your kids." The movement behind these curricular changes found success almost entirely by threatening, embarrassing, and insulting people who stood in their way. They have never improved the lives of the people they claim to champion. Nor have they ever behaved in a dignified way to people who had reservations or objections to their work.

The impetus for the folly of teaching kids about strange sexualities comes from a group of people who were wrong about every measure they promoted to society at large; they are largely responsible for millions of people in America dying of AIDS not to mention the new drug-resistant forms of syphilis and gonorrhea; they have contributed to mental health disasters among millions of gay Americans caught in a subculture of unstable relationships and unhealthy beauty standards; they are responsible for a spike in same-sex rapes in the military and partly to blame for the rise in military suicides; they have complained about bullying and teen suicide for decades and have only aggravated these problems with every youth program they've tested; they undermined the adoption system and contributed to the growth of new forms of human trafficking and eugenics to meet their demand for designer babies; they have been the single greatest force in destroying free speech at schools and universities with their gross distortions of Title IX and anti-harassment laws... but worst of all, they are horrible, vicious people who have made the gay subculture, once a place of blossoming creativity, a place of acrimony and nastiness.

In coming posts, I will present a cast of characters and tell you about what they've done in the past, the many lies they've told and people they've ruined, the spite and bile and slander they've fueled across the globe. 

Because we've been here before. They've come to the public many times with sob stories and platitudes about love and tolerance. And they've never been truthful or right about what they've presented to the public. 

If you let them burn you in Texas schools, you can't claim you didn't see it coming.

Our colleague Michelle Cretella appeared on Tucker Carlson!

Beware the Square of Death

Saturday, July 22, 2017

Dr. Michele Cretella's Testimony to Texas State Senate on SB3 / SB91

David Pickup, LMFT's Testimony to Texas Senate Committee on SB-3

Statement to Senate Committee, 07-21-2017, SB3 “Bathroom” Bill

My name is David Pickup. I am a licensed psychotherapist who holds private practices in Dallas and Los Angeles. I work primarily with men who experience gender dysphoria, gender inferiority issues, and emotional abandonment from childhood. I am writing in favor of SB3.

Do you know what it is to feel deeply confused from a young age that your body is one sex but you feel like another? Do you know what it feels like to be depressed, suicidal, discouraged and detached from your own body and from the people who were supposed to love and affirm you? My clients do. Therapy can resolve these issues.

I mean no disrespect at all when I say that allowing biological males in women’s restrooms is tantamount to abuse. It’s abuse to those people who are many times not aware of their own deep emotional issues and to those for whom this is an issue of safety. Not passing this bill would be unconsciously participating in dysfunction. Statistically, most dysphorics resolve their gender dysphoria diagnosis by their 20s. Why do LGBT activists not offer funds for therapy that works to resolve these issues rather than fight for a political agenda that has no basis in fact? Denial of truth is never therapeutic. Perpetuating a fundamental untruth is never compassionate or politically mandated.

I can assure you that safety in bathrooms is indeed a real issue. It’s an issue of emotional and physical safety for all concerned, even for those who don’t know it. There are men, (not usually transgenders), who would take advantage of girls and women in locker rooms and bathrooms if given opportunity to do so. Take the road of compassion and health. Pass the “Bathroom” bill.

David Pickup, LMFT