Home ›

Public Advocate

Printer-friendly version Send to friend

Public Advocate: Congress Using Schools "To Force The Homosexual Agenda" On Children

Submitted by Brian Tashman on April 13, 2011 - 2:09pm

As seen in the new Right Wing Watch: In Focus “Big Bullies: How the Religious Right is Trying to Make Schools Safe for Bullies and Dangerous for Gay Kids,” Religious Right groups are consistently trying to tarnish anti-bullying initiatives as “homosexual indoctrination” and “special rights,” among other absurd claims. A Religious Right group led by Virginia politician Eugene Delgaudio, the Public Advocate, now launched the “Protect Our Children’s Innocence” petition to protest the Student Nondiscrimination Act, which it labels the “Homosexual Classrooms Act”:

Whereas: Schools should be institutions of learning, dedicated to the unbiased and unpoliticized pursuit of knowledge equally for all students; and

Whereas: The mis-named "Student Non-Discrimination Act" actually DOES discriminate by creating special protected classes of students; and

Whereas: More accurately-named the "Homosexual Classrooms Act," the "Student Non-Discrimination Act" targets children with homosexual propaganda far over their heads in an attempt to sexually confuse and corrupt; and

Whereas: Government should have NO AUTHORITY to force the Homosexual Agenda on the American people, much less their children;

Therefore: As your constituent and a concerned pro-family voter, I strongly insist you oppose the so-called "Student Non-Discrimination Act," and make every attempt to see it defeated.

PFAW
Filed under:

It Was Only A Matter of Time

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on January 22, 2010 - 2:44pm

In addition to serving as president of the right-wing fringe group Public Advocate - which is known primarily for engaging in "humorous" street protests in the vein of Randall Terry's antics, though typically with less "success" - Eugene Delgaudio is also on the Board of Supervisors in Loudoun County, Virginia.

And so, to anyone familiar with him, his antics, or his views, it should come as absolutely no surprise that he's now gotten himself in trouble:

Advocacy group Equality Loudoun this week denounced Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio's reaction to the addition of an equal opportunity amendment to the county's policy handbook, extending employment rights to gay, lesbian and transgender residents.

During discussions over the addition in a Jan. 5 board meeting, Delgaudio (R-Sterling) called the plan "freaky, bizarre and fruity."

He also used the word "it" during the meeting and in his electronic newsletter to describe transgender individuals.

...

In his newsletter Delgaudio wrote: "The board votes six yes, Waters and Delgaudio 'no,' with York abstaining, to add 'sexual orientation' and 'gender identity' to the hiring of employees which means if a man dressed as a woman wants a job, you have to treat 'it' the same as a normal person."

...

Delgaudio said he stands by the statement he made in the Jan. 5 meeting when he referred to the amendment as "freaky, bizarre and fruity."

The language, he said, was aimed at what he described as a militant group of individuals.

"It's freaky because most don't think about homosexuals," Delgaudio said. "It's bizarre because they want us to think about homosexuals."

And check out this news report on controversy in which Delgaudio tries to claim that the "it" he was referring to in his email was "the action of hiring" and was not meant to be a derogatory attack on transgendered people:

Out of all the humorous stunts Delguadio has pulled over the years, I have to say that this pathetic defense is the only one that has ever made me laugh.

PFAW
Filed under:

"Obama Is After Our Children"

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on September 8, 2009 - 9:15am

A quick round-up of some right-wing efforts to capitalize on the absurd "controversy" over President Obama's planned speech to the nation's students today.

Public Advocate announces that they will be protesting the venue:

Public Advocate volunteers will protest President Barack Obama on Tuesday morning September 8 prior to his speech at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia starting at 10:15 a.m.

Public Advocate volunteers will hold banners that state "Mr. President, Stay Away from our kids" at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va.

Earlier, on Monday at 5:30 p.m. Public Advocate volunteers posted signs protesting the visit of President Barack Obama at Wakefield High School where the president will be Tuesday morning.

Signs that stated "Mr. President, Stay Away From Our Kids" were posted along Leesburg Pike, Route 50 Arlington Boulevard, and several area schools in Northern Virginia.

The Family Research Council uses the issue to further its own campaign against Kevin Jennings:

In his inaugural speech in 1961 President John F. Kennedy delivered this memorable line

["Ask not..." clip]

Fast forward nearly 50 years and President Barack Obama was poised to ask the nations elementary school students not what they could do for their country but what they could do for their President.

The White House announced that the President would be speaking live to the nations k-6th graders. The Department of Education had prepared a work sheet to accompany the speech in which the children were instructed to engage in several exercises including writing a letter about how they could help the president.

After a fire storm of opposition erupted the White House changed lesson plans and now the youngsters will be asked to consider how they can help themselves achieve their educational goals. Certainly a more appropriate question, but one that is probably more suited for middle and high school students.

However, parents remain considered. Some are keeping their kids home from school on the day of the speech. Over 95% of parents who responded to an FRC survey said the President should not be speaking to children during classroom hours.

Some in the media have decried the parental opposition as partisan. But it is really?

Consider that this speech is being made during one of the most controversial public policy debates in years in which the president has been steadily losing public support for his health care plan.

But even if the speech does not interject policy into the class room of 6 & 7 year old children, when parents consider the agenda of this administration as represented by the presidents appointments to the education department parents have a right to be concerned.

The Secretary of the department, Arne Duncan, has promoted some pretty controversial ideas, like special schools for homosexual students when he was head of the Chicago school system. Even more concerning is Kevin Jennings who is supposedly in charge of the Safe and Drug Free School Program for the Department of Education.

Jennings is the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Educational Network, an organization that promotes homosexuality in the public schools, he also wrote the forward to a book entitled Queering Elementary Education.

This Administration has given parents plenty of reason to be concern over what is piped into the classroom. For more visit FRC.org

And the Liberty Counsel likewise throws in an attack on Jennings while calling the speech an "illegal political move" and warning that "Obama is after our children":

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: "Obama has pushed his political agenda to the extreme by forcing himself on America's children. Obama's political agenda on healthcare and his expansive vision for government is being rejected by the American people. Now Obama is after our children, who, like some socialist members of Congress, have not read the healthcare bill. Americans do not appreciate the President's attempt to use our children as political pawns in his game of chess. Mr. President, you must abide by the rule of law and stop this illegal activity. Our children do not belong to you."

PFAW
Filed under:

Sotomayor Day II: Let The Antics Begin

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on July 14, 2009 - 9:08am

After disrupting yesterday's hearing, anti-choice protesters affiliated with Randall Terry are vowing more action:

Next on the agenda:

"Desecrate Roe" Event Details---

Where: Corner of 1st and C St., near Dirksen Senate Building entrance, Washington D.C.

When: 9:00 A.M., Tuesday, July 14

Who: Norma McCorvey, Randall Terry and other DC area leaders and pro-lifers

Pro-life advocates will gather at the Dirksen building at the corner of 1st and C St., to publicly desecrate the Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade decision. Joining her will be Randall Terry, Missy Smith, and other local pro-life leaders.

Randall Terry states, "Victory over child-killing requires courage and leadership from 'pro-life' Senators from both parties. It is long overdue for so called 'pro-life' Senators to fulfill their campaign promises. They claim they want to overturn Roe; well, now is the time to see if they will defend the babies, or submit like cowards to Obama.

"Republican 'Pro-life' Senators bear special responsibility in this; they shamelessly prostitute Roe vs. Wade and babies lives. Does 'GOP' stand for 'Good Ol' Pimps'? Or will GOP Senators actually fight in this life and death struggle? They need to filibuster Sotomayor."

Will there be more arrests? To be seen...

Not to be outdone, Eugene Delgaudio and Public Advocate plan to be descend on Capitol Hill to create their own scene:

"Public Advocate's Sotomayor's UnReality Tour" arrives in Washington Tuesday to show what a world according to Judge Sonia Sotomayer would look like if she were a Supreme Court judge.

Lifeguards who can't swim. A doctor who flunked med school. A 3rd grade university president. Blind train conductors. Cooks who can't boil water. Lawyers who did not pass the bar exam but who are now judges.

Demonstrators will hold a sign "Sonia Sotomayor, Wrong on the firemen, wrong for America." Another member of Public Advocate will hold a sign with the words "Thanks to Sonia Sotomayor, I flunked med school and am now a doctor."

In related news, Randall Terry continues his broadsides against Republican senators:

"Does the 'GOP' stand for 'Good Ol' Pimps'? Republican Senators like Graham, Brownback, McCain, etc., have seduced the pro-life movement, made her their mistress, and then a prostitute. She gives them her 'favors' in exchange for empty promises.

"They pimp the pro-life cause, raising millions of dollars with promises to 'overturn Roe' and protect the unborn. The party platform - their false vows - calls for the overturn of Roe, and legal protection of unborn babies.

"But alas, we again see that these are seductive lies; and like any good pimp, they tell us that they love us, while they sell us out; they feign pain as we are abused and babies are murdered, while they prepare to get in bed with those who despise us, and slay the innocent.

"Our protests and rallies over the coming weeks will focus on GOP Senators who claim to be pro-life. We will call on them to stop pimping the babies, but rather to fight for them by filibustering Sotomayor."

Richard Viguerie claims that "Sotomayor's opening statement reflects she is already being defensive about the judicial philosophy she shares with President Obama."

Richard Land and the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission come out against Sotomayor:

Sonia Sotomayor’s record reveals that she is perfectly willing to lift the blindfold of justice to achieve her desired result. She is a judge with a terribly flawed view of the judicial system at best or a judge who simply doesn’t care what the law says at worst. She has constantly shown her lack of deference to the Constitution. She is the type of justice who instead of applying the law neutrally will redefine the law to conform to her policy preferences.

The bottom line is that Sonia Sotomayor is an unpredictable wildcard. Across the issues her record is either far too thin or hidden behind non-published orders and per curium opinions. Simply put, placing Sonia Sotomayor on the highest court in the land jeopardizes our nation’s commitment to equal treatment under the law.

The Family Research Council posts the Senate Policy Committee talking points in opposing Sotomayor while releasing its own list of questions it wants asked during the hearing:

Abortion and the Supreme Court

* Judge Sotomayor, while you were associated with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, it filed six briefs in five abortion-related cases before the United States Supreme Court. In every case, those briefs asserted that the Court should adopt an uncompromising, pro-abortion position. Do you now wish to express any disagreement with the content of the briefs that were filed by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund?

The Abortion Industry as Litigants

* Judge Sotomayor, do you believe abortion providers should be required to prove factual assertions they make in court when challenging abortion regulations?

* Judge Sotomayor, should redacted medical records be admissible, if needed by the court, to examine general medical claims about abortion?When should such records not be made available to the court?

* Judge Sotomayor, should prosecutors be permitted to subpoena and examine abortion facility records to determine whether state statutory rape laws have been violated or whether the facility is reporting potential crimes to the appropriate legal authorities?

Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life tells Lifenews that she is looking forward to testifying in opposition to Sotomayor:

“We are honored to have the opportunity to testify before the Judiciary Committee about the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the highest court in the land," Yoest told LifeNews.com about her invitation.

"I am looking forward to sharing AUL’s extensive legal research about Judge Sotomayor’s record. In particular, her radical associations and judicial philosophy raises serious concerns in the pro-life community," she said.

Yoest is referring to Sotomayor's tenure with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, a group that has submitted numerous Supreme Court briefs arguing for an unrestricted right to abortion and claiming any pro-life limits are racist.

Although leaders with the group argue Sotomayor had no involvement in writing or approving the briefs, her longtime position as a member of its board of directors points to her support for the pro-abortion position the group took, Yoest maintains.

Yoest told LifeNews.com she plans to focus her testimony on making the connection for the senators and the American public between the positions taken by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund during her tenure on the Board and her judicial interventionist approach to the bench.

“Her PRLDEF record proves that she is an abortion advocate," Yoest says.

"That record includes opposition to parental notification, opposition to informed consent, opposition to bans on partial-birth abortion and support for taxpayer-funded abortions. These positions are far outside the mainstream of American public opinion," she explained.

And finally, Pat Buchanan continues to be ... well, Pat Buchanan:

The chutzpah of this Beltway crowd does not cease to amaze.

They archly demand that conservatives accord a self-described “affirmative action baby” from Princeton a respect they never for a moment accorded a pro-life conservative mother of five from Idaho State, Sarah Palin.

...

Sonia is, first and foremost, a Latina. She has not hesitated to demand, even in college and law school, ethnic and gender preferences for her own. Her concept of justice is race-based.

...

Even if Sotomayor is confirmed, making the nation aware she is a militant supporter since college days of ethnic and gender preferences is an assignment worth pursuing. For America does not believe in preferences. Even in the blue states of California, Washington and Michigan, voters have tossed them out as naked discrimination against white males.

PFAW
Filed under:
Syndicate content