Home ›

Massachusetts

Printer-friendly version Send to friend

Steve Baldwin Claims 'Human Events' Publisher is Gay, Says Romney 'Obsessed' with Gay Rights

Submitted by Miranda Blue on January 12, 2012 - 5:04pm

Steve Baldwin, the former executive director of the Council for National Policy, an influential conservative policy group founded by Tim LaHaye, went on the Steve Deace show yesterday to discuss why he thinks a President Romney would be disastrous for the country and the Republican Party. Baldwin’s major gripe is his dubious claim that Romney was “obsessed” with gay rights as governor of Massachusetts.

Baldwin expressed frustration that Romney has been given a “free pass” by conservative media, which he chalked up to “conflicts of interest” in the right-wing press. Among those he claimed are biased towards Romney is the publisher of the far-right Human Events, whom he identified as a “homosexual who likes Romney.” Although he didn’t name names on the show, Baldwin has previously asserted that Jeff Carneal, president of Human Events' publisher, is an “avowed homosexual” who has supported pro-equality causes.

But Baldwin’s gay-baiting did not end with his attack on conservative media. He let loose on Romney’s tepid pro-gay rights record as governor of Massachusetts, saying, “His whole administration was characterized by an almost obsessive devotion to the homosexual agenda.” Romney, he fumes, was involved in “gay proclamations, gay dances, gay proms, gay assemblies, gay this, gay that,” adding obliquely, “You gotta start wondering here.”

Baldwin: Our conservative media won’t write negative stories about Romney. They won’t even investigate him. I’ve submitted story after story to National Review, to Human Events, to American Spectator, and every once in a while they’ll do a story with a few negative things about Romney, but a full-scale investigative piece about Romney has not appeared in most of the conservative movement’s media. And you’ll find out there’s conflicts of interests, you’ll find out National Review endorsed Romney last year, they like him this year. You’ll find out that the chairman of Regnery Gateway, that publishes Human Events, is a homosexual who likes Romney. You find out these editors have various biases. And as a result, they have collectively, along with talk radio I have to add – Sean Hannity likes Romney, a lot of our radio talk show hosts have been very hands off when it comes to Romney’s record, even though they have all been briefed and all been given information about Romney’s background. Coulter and other national columnists and Hannity and even Mark Levin say very little about Romney’s record and refuse to dig into it. So you hear nothing from our own media, so the mainstream media, they’re too lazy to dig up the stories. And so as a result, Romney’s getting a free pass here.

…

Deace: Does Mitt Romney have a history of supporting homosexual issues beyond the gay scoutmasters thing that we saw from 1994? What did he do in Massachusetts when he was governor?

Baldwin: Oh my goodness. Gay proclamations, gay dances, gay proms, gay assemblies, gay this, gay that. He had an entire commission called the Governor’s Commission, which served at his own discretion, and they funded gay events and programs in the schools. He promoted all kinds of laws, rules, internal, a lot of internal things, like his department of social services awarded Family of the Year, Parents of the Year, to a gay couple. He appointed homosexual leaders to key positions throughout his administration. I mean, his whole administration was characterized by a an almost obsessive devotion to the homosexual agenda. I would venture to say that Mitt Romney was the most aggressive pro-gay governor in American history, either party. Period. I mean Amy Contrada wrote a thousand page book documenting hundreds of actions by this man to advance the homosexual agenda. Hundreds. He was obsessed with it. You gotta start wondering here.

PFAW
Filed under:

Fellow Catholics slam bishops' 'Marriage Guy' over 'Satan Makes Gays' column

Submitted by Peter Montgomery on November 4, 2011 - 9:40am

On Monday we reported that Daniel Avila, the Catholic bishops' "marriage guy," had written a remarkable column in The Pilot, the official newspaper of the Archdioecese of Boston, claiming that Satan, "the evil one," was responsible for turning people gay when they were in their mothers' wombs.  Talking about gays as devil-spawned "natural disasters" struck us as something more likely to come from anti-gay conservative evangelicals than from a policy advisor to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage.

Just a couple of days after the column appeared, it was yanked from the Pilot website and replaced with a double-barrelled retraction and apology: one from Avila saying his column did not reflect church policy and apologizing for the "hurt and confusion" it had caused; and one from the paper's editors for "for having failed to recognize the theological error in the column before publication." (Avila's not did not say that he personally has abandoned his Satan-Makes-You-Gay theory.)

Journalist Chuck Colbert sheds light on what may have led to the rare retraction and apology, in an article documenting a range of outraged responses to the column from Avila's fellow Catholics. Among the most striking is a letter written by a group of staff members at the Paulist Center, a religious community in Boston:

 In a note to community members, staffers shared the contents of their letter to The Pilot. “We feel compelled to express our dismay,” they wrote.

“Beyond the highly questionable theology of this writer, pastoral ministry and care for GLBTQ Catholics, for any human person, requires first preserving their dignity as children of God. Our shared mission of outreach and pastoral care prohibits inflicting harm and pain on any human person,” the staff added.  

Staffers continued, “This article directly and intentionally causes pain for gay Catholics, their families, especially their mothers, their friends and their worship communities,” adding, “The article has no scriptural basis, vague Catholic theological constructs, and no connection with the Gospel of Christ.”

Colbert notes that some Catholic activists say that this is not the first editorial misjudgment the Pilot has made regarding articles about LGBT people, and some are calling for the editor to resign.

If you missed Avila's devil-blaming column before it was pulled from the Pilot's site, you can read it  here thanks to the folks at the Religion News Service.

PFAW Foundation
Filed under:

Catholic Bishops' 'Marriage Guy' Says Satan Makes People Gay

Submitted by Peter Montgomery on October 31, 2011 - 12:35pm

Daniel Avila is the self-described "marriage guy" for the Catholic bishops.  More formally, he is the policy advisor for marriage and family to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage. He thinks people are gay because Satan was messing around with them while they were in their mothers' wombs. God, he says, has nothing to do with it.

Therefore, whenever natural causes disturb otherwise typical biological development, leading to the personally unchosen beginnings of same-sex attraction, the ultimate responsibility, on a theological level, is and should be imputed to the evil one, not God.

Writing in The Pilot, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Boston, Avila cites one scientist’s theory that homosexual orientation is the result of fluctuations in maternal hormones. To that thesis, he adds a gigantic leap: the devil must be doing it. 
In other words, the scientific evidence of how same-sex attraction most likely may be created provides a credible basis for a spiritual explanation that indicts the devil. Any time natural disasters occur, we as people of faith look back to Scripture's account of those angels who rebelled and fell from grace. In their anger against God, these malcontents prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. They continue to do all they can to mar, distort and destroy God's handiwork. 
Avila gave no hint of his satanic origin theory of homosexuality when he spoke at the Values Voter Summit in October, though it (and the reference to natural disasters) does sound like the kind of thing one would hear from anti-gay conservative evangelicals.  At the Values Voter Summit, Avila urged people not to accept that marriage equality is inevitable. He claimed that anti-equality forces in Massachusetts are building political strength toward repeal of marriage equality, a notion rejected out of hand by equality advocates familiar with the state.
PFAW Foundation
Filed under:

Massachusetts Republican Wants Rape Victims To Stay In The Shadows If They're Undocumented Immigrants

Submitted by Brian Tashman on June 8, 2011 - 2:56pm

In a speech berating Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick’s opposition to a controversial federal immigration program, a Republican state legislator said that illegal immigrants who were victims of rape should be afraid to come forward. State Rep. Ryan Fattman brushed aside the claims of immigrant advocates that the program, which would allow local police officers to refer undocumented immigrants they arrest for any reason to federal authorities, would damage the relationship between law enforcement and immigrant communities or lead to racial profiling.

The Worcester Telegram & Gazette reports that Fattman even claimed that undocumented immigrants who are victims of rape should be afraid to talk to the police:

Mr. Fattman dismissed concerns of some law enforcement officials — cited by the governor — who said using local police to enforce immigration laws could discourage reporting of crime by victims who are illegal immigrants.

Asked if he would be concerned that a woman without legal immigration status was raped and beaten as she walked down the street might be afraid to report the crime to police, Mr. Fattman said he was not worried about those implications.

“My thought is that if someone is here illegally, they should be afraid to come forward,” Mr. Fattman said. “If you do it the right way, you don’t have to be concerned about these things,” he said referring to obtaining legal immigration status.

…

“If they are here illegally, they have committed a crime,” he said. However, under federal law, illegal status is usually a civil offense.

“My philosophy is a little different,” Mr. Fattman said. He said he believes all illegal immigrants should be deported, including the children of immigrants who came with their parents to the U.S.

PFAW
Filed under:

MassResistance Loses It Over Profile of Lively

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on January 12, 2011 - 12:14pm

Last week, the Boston Globe ran a lengthy profile on Scott Lively and his new mission focusing on helping the downtrodden.  Given Lively's notorious reputation as anti-gay activist, some felt that the Globe article was more or less a puff piece that didn't adequately expose Lively's history .. but Lively's anti-gay allies at MassResistance had a different reaction, sending out a long email blasting the piece as "possibly the worst Globe attack article against a pro-family figure in memory" and calling for right-wing activists to refuse to talk to the Globe ever again: 

The mainstream media's anti-family, anti-Christian propaganda campaign has taken a disturbing turn. Last week the Boston Globe published a particularly vicious front-page article attacking Scott Lively, a well-known pro-family activist, pastor, writer, and lecturer. It was done in a cowardly, dishonest manner where the reporter misrepresented himself and went against Dr. Lively's wishes regarding the interview.

Scott Lively is known and respected in pro-family circles around the world. He is also an attorney and has a doctorate in theology. But his principled stand on homosexuality and biblical morality, which includes several books exposing the homosexual agenda, has earned him the vitriol of homosexual activists.

Dr. Lively, a Massachusetts native, moved back to Springfield a few years ago to start an inner-city Christian ministry. This apparently angers the Globe and prompted them to publish the article.

Going far beyond mere "bias", it's possibly the worst Globe attack article against a pro-family figure in memory.

...

The mainstream media is now starting to take the gloves off. It's possible that the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" repeal was a watershed of sorts. Traditional religious belief (particularly regarding homosexuality) has been attacked for a while, but we were still somewhat tolerated. Many in the mainstream media now believe that traditional religious belief must be purged from society. To do that, it needs to be considered a hateful aberration, even a a mental illness.

For example, notice that in both the articles (including #2 below) the label "anti-gay pastor" is used to describe Scott Lively, even though his opinions would be considered mainstream among most Americans. It's a conscious effort to demonize criticism of homosexuality, to make it a label that marginalizes him. (Of course, they would never label anyone "pro-gay" because that is now considered normal.)

...

What the Boston Globe (and Springfield Republican) did to Scott Lively is in our opinion only the beginning. They are clearly out to demonize and attack us, and twist our words into propaganda against us. They may have a broad First Amendment right to do these things, but we don't have to help them. Thus, MassResistance is calling on the entire pro-family and conservative movement not to grant any interviews whatsoever with them or talk to their reporters.

PFAW
Filed under:

Tea Party Leaders Preparing for Primary Fights to Bolster GOP's Ideological Purity

Submitted by Brian Tashman on December 27, 2010 - 3:35pm

Back in January the Christian Science Monitor declared “Scott Brown: the tea party’s first electoral victory,” following his surprise win in the special election to fill the Senate seat of the late Ted Kennedy. But now the Boston Globe reports that conservatives and Tea Party activists are mulling over a primary challenge to the Massachusetts Republican. According to the Globe, Brown’s votes in favor of repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, ratifying the START Treaty, and reforming Wall Street (but only after it was watered down to win his support) made him toxic to many Tea Party members and other movement conservatives. The Family Research Council has pledged to back a primary challenger to any Senator who voted to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and the National Republican Trust PAC promised to do the same to any Republican who supported START.

More surprisingly, movement conservatives in Virginia are hoping to block George Allen from running again for the seat he lost to Jim Webb in 2006. Allen, a former Senator and Governor best known for using a racial slur against his opponent’s campaign worker, is already finding himself in trouble with Tea Party groups even though he hasn’t even announced his candidacy yet. The Washington Post reports that Allen’s voting record in the Senate may sink his chances among Virginia Tea Partiers:

For months, it appeared that former U.S. senator George Allen would have a clear path to the Republican nomination if he chose to try to reclaim his old job.

But in the summer, grumbling about his past began, culminating in a Web site outlining the reasons some fellow Republicans oppose him: He's too moderate. He's part of the establishment. He's partly to blame for the record spending and ballooning deficit in Washington.

By this month, no fewer than four Republicans billing themselves as more conservative than Allen were considering challenging him for the right to run against Sen. James Webb, if the Virginia Democrat seeks reelection.

"There are some concerns based on his record and his rhetoric," said Mark Kevin Lloyd, chairman of the Lynchburg Tea Party and vice chairman of the Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation, a statewide umbrella group. "People are looking at things in a new light," he said.

Allen, who received a 92.3% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, was hardly considered a moderate in the Senate. But apparently 92% isn’t enough:

But during his one term in the U.S. Senate, some Republicans complain, he backed President George W. Bush's proposals to increase spending; supported No Child Left Behind, a costly program to create a national education report card; favored a federal program to subsidize the costs of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries; and voted to expand the Hate Crimes Prevention Act to include crimes based on sexual orientation.

Jamie Ratdke, who recently stepped down as chairwoman of the Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation in order to explore a Senate bid, said she began to consider a run for the Senate after attending a Tea Party convention that featured Rick Santorum, Lou Dobbs, and Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinnelli as speakers:

Radtke said that she had considered running for the state Senate next year but that she began thinking about the U.S. Senate instead after Virginia's first tea party convention, which drew an estimated 2,800 people to Richmond in October.

Radtke, who worked for Allen for a year when he was governor and she was right out of college, said it's time for a new candidate. She said that Allen was part of "George Bush's expansion of government" when he was senator and that she was concerned about some of his stances on abortion.

Allen has said that abortions should be legal in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is endangered, and he owned stock in the manufacturer of the morning-after pill.

If George Allen is deemed not conservative enough for the Republican Party, then expect many more extremist candidates like Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell to win contested GOP primaries. Allen hurt his chances by supporting healthcare and education initiatives that were backed by President Bush and the Republican leadership, and is also deemed too moderate because he voted to include sexual orientation under hate crimes protections and believes in exceptions under a ban on abortion.

While running for reelection in 2006, Allen received wide praise at FRC’s Values Voter Summit for his staunch conservative beliefs, but now he is under attack from the Right for being “too moderate” even though he hasn’t served in public office since he lost the 2006 race. As Corey Stewart, chairman of the Prince William County board of supervisors and a likely primary opponent, says, Allen’s “base has moved on.”

PFAW
Filed under:

MassResistance's Scott Lively Write-In Campaign Falls Flat

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on September 29, 2010 - 2:38pm

Last month we noted that MassResistance was unhappy with Charlie Baker, the candidate expected to win the Republican primary for Governor in Massachusetts, so they launched a write-in campaign for Scott Lively, creating a situation where one SPLC-certified anti-gay hate group was trying to get the head of another SPLC-certified anti-gay hate elected governor.

So how did that effort turn out?  According to an email update from MassResistance, they did not have much success:

It was a spirited try, but unfortunately never got the necessary momentum or publicity.

Although Jim McKenna was an overwhelming success as a write-in candidate to get on the ballot for Attorney General in the Sept. 14 Massachusetts Republican Primary, the other pro-family candidates fell seriously short ...

Republican Primary Totals - Statewide

CHARLIE BAKER 215,008
SCOTT LIVELY (write-in) 1,021
TIMOTHY CAHILL (write-in) 448

MassResistance goes on to allege that Lively received more votes than listed on the official totals, but that local election officials refused to count them:  

For example, in Newton the election officials have declared that Scott Lively received no write-in votes. However, we contacted seven Newton voters who said they definitely wrote-in Scott Lively on the ballot. (We're going to investigate this some more.) It's not a huge amount, but it really makes you wonder about the accuracy of the whole system. In addition, the Newton officials were pretty condescending about the our concerns.

If these seven votes had been counted, Lively's percentage of the overall vote total would have increased from .471% to .474%, so I can't imagine why election officials in Newton could have been so condescending about MassResistance's concerns.

PFAW
Filed under:

Camenker and MassResistance Push Scott Lively For Governor

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on August 12, 2010 - 10:31am

Last month we noted that Brian Camenker of MassResistance had been invited to speak at a local Tea Party rally in Massachusetts, only to see the entire rally collapse after other speakers backed out when they learned that he was be participating.

He's been complaining about it ever since and lashing out at the "RINOs" who are trying to keep social conservatives like him out of the movement instead of recognizing the real reason, which is that his organization is listed as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. 

Which makes this new email from MassResistance all the more interesting, as Camenker is urging activists to write in Scott Lively for Governor:

This week we are urging people to write in Scott Lively for Governor, against Charlie Baker.

Scott Lively lives in Springfield and is known as a major pro-family figure not only in the U.S. but internationally. He is an attorney, pastor (with a PhD in theology), pro-family activist, and author of several books. He also spent time as an international consultant on family issues with more than twenty years of ministry opposing the "gay" political agenda around the world.

Dr. Lively is founder of Abiding Truth Ministries, the Pro-Family Law Center, DefendTheFamily.com, and most recently the Redemption Gate Ministry Society in Springfield, Mass.. Over the past 20 years he has also lectured and consulted on pro-family strategies in more than 30 countries.

Like Glenn Beck, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, the Tea Party Movement, MassResistance, and many more, Scott Lively has been demonized by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a "hate group" - a disgusting tactic meant to marginalize effective conservatives. For his beliefs and activism he has withstood pressure that would overcome most people.

Lively is everything that Charlie Baker is not. He is principled, pro-family, pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-2nd-amendment, pro-religion, pro-parents' rights, and utterly fearless.

Send a clear message to the RINO establishment

There's nothing quite like voting for someone you actually support, rather than the lesser of two (or three) evils.

And by thousands (we hope!) of people voting for Scott Lively as a write-in candidate in the September 14 Republican Primary, a very strong statement will be made to the RINO Republican establishment, especially since relatively few people vote in most primaries. Don't assume you own us. What you're selling, we're not buying. The people running the Massachusetts Republican Party love to use social conservatives to do the grunt work on campaigns, but they arrogantly see themselves as above "dirtying" themselves with the principled issues that conservatives care about.

That's right: the head of one Massachusetts based SPLC-certified anti-gay hate group is urging his supporters to support the head of another Massachusetts based SPLC-certified anti-gay hate group for governor. 

In the same email, Camenker brags that he has been invited to speak at a South Boston Tea Party rally at Fort Independence on August 22 with Don Feder and others. 

Unlike the other cowardly Tea Party activists who didn't want anything to do with Camenker, "South Boston Tea Party president Susan Long invites everyone to come and make a statement: If Tea Partiers upset the Left and the political establishment, well -- so be it."

Will they still feel that way about letting Camenker participate when then learn that he wants to see someone like Lively elected Governor? 

PFAW
Filed under:

FRC Again Asks MA Residents to Contact "Senator Kirk"

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on August 10, 2010 - 12:59pm

Does anyone at the Family Research Council actually know who the two US Senators are who represent Massachusetts? 

They are Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Scott Brown.

And the reason I ask is because for the second time in a month, FRC is asking Massachusetts residents to contact "Sen. Kirk" ... this time to "take a firm and principled stand against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act":

Does FRC really not know that Paul Kirk was just the interim Senator tapped to fill the late Ted Kennedy's seat and that he was replaced by Scott Brown earlier this year?  You'd think they would considering that they hailed Brown's election as "the culmination of thousands of townhalls, tea parties, and angry voters" a mere six months ago.

PFAW
Filed under:

Camenker Reacts (Badly) to Tea Party Collapse Over His Anti-Gay Views

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on July 26, 2010 - 10:11am

Last week we noted that a Tea Party rally scheduled for this weekend in Massachusetts collapsed after several speakers dropped out due to MassResistance's Brian Camenker scheduled participation.

Needless to say, Camenker is absolutely outraged, noting that he has been a speaker at several Tea Parties rallies before and was even invited "to an exclusive Tea Party breakfast with Sen. Scott Brown."

Camenker partially blames the Southern Poverty Law Center's designation of MassResistance as a hate group for the debacle, but reserves most of the blame for Christen Varley, a rival Tea Party leader: 

MassResistance has talked to several people and gotten first-hand accounts of what happened.

It apparently started with Christen Varley, head of the "Greater Boston Tea Party", a different Tea Party organization than the Lexington group. Varley is also an employee of Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI), a "moderate" pro-family group, through an MFI affiliate that consults with political candidates. (Some would say that is a conflict of interest.) She also has strong ties to the state Republican establishment.

This week Varley contacted the Lexington Tea Party's speakers and advised them -- in fairly strong terms -- not to appear if Camenker was included ... Unlike other Tea Party leaders around the country, Varley is well-liked by the mainstream media. She's considered sensible and moderate by the establishment press. (Not like the other Tea Party "rabble" which the media have only contempt for.) As head of the Greater Boston Tea Party she's had numerous friendly articles published about her in the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, and even the Wall Street Journal, as well as many "softball" local radio interviews.

By her own admission, Varley tries to exclude discussion of "social issues" from all of her Tea Party events. It's all about fiscal issues, she says.

Hostility to the parents' rights movement. Last year Varley invited MassResistance to speak at one of her Tea Party events, but under the condition that we did not talk about the homosexual agenda in schools. After we refused and told others about her restriction, Varley left several angry phone messages at our office, referring to parents who were battling the gay agenda in the schools as "nut jobs."

Camenker then lists the participants who dropped out by name in a "Hall of shame" before concluding that the entire thing is "an absolute disgrace, and represents the worst kind of anti-family RINO sleaziness": 

We have never seen anything like this deliberately done to a Tea Party anywhere in America. It's an absolute disgrace, and represents the worst kind of anti-family RINO sleaziness. There are hundreds of thousands (and this year possibly millions) of taxpayer dollars going directly to the radical homosexual / transgender agenda in our schools to target children in Massachusetts. The idea that this should not be challenged at Tea Parties -- and that those who do speak out should be demonized -- is beyond offensive.

PFAW
Filed under:
Syndicate content