I don’t know if I’m the only one who has noticed that the world has become a more dangerous place for our children to live in. This is the last thing a parent wants to hear, believe me, I know.  No one wants to add any more anxiety to the already long list of worries a parent has while rearing their children. However, I must say this because I care. I wish I could say that the world is becoming a much safer place for our children to live in, but I can’t, because just the opposite is happening.

So, the information I’m about to share is intended to make us aware of the dangers raising up out there, so that as parents we can all make informed decisions when it comes to keeping our children safe—completely out of harm’s way. Well, maybe not completely out of harm’s way—that might not be humanly possible, but at least, to do all that we can possibly do to keep them out of harm’s way. So, here we go:

Parents Beware Alert

The LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and ‘transgender’) movement wants our children, and President Obama is backing them up every step of the way. They want access to our children to twist their minds and to persuade them into thinking that maybe, just maybe they might be gay, and thus persuade them into trying the homosexual lifestyle. They want to convince every man, woman and child that deep down they’re all homosexuals–they just don’t know it yet because they haven’t tried it.

In the fall, Obama told the Washington Blade what gay activists could expect under an Obama presidency. “I will continue to do what I’ve done throughout my career and in this campaign,” he said, “speak out on behalf of the cause for … for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and ‘transgender’) Americans.”

In April 2008, Obama told a gay-activist magazine: “I for a very long time have been interested in repeal of DOMA” (the Defense of Marriage Act, which is the only thing preventing same-sex “marriage” from spreading across the U.S.). http://www.citizenlink.org

Ever since elected, this group’s ambitious agenda seems to be in the president’s highest-of-priorities-list, and it is taking priority over our children safety. How?

SB 200: The Bathroom Bill… sexual predators could take advantage of the confusion caused by this law — and endanger women and children in public bathrooms.

Colorado recently enacted SB 200, a law that opens “public accommodations” — including public restrooms — to members of the opposite sex. In other words, men who consider themselves to be women, may go in the “women” labeled restrooms and vise versa. In the name of protecting transgendered individuals from discrimination, Colorado has paved the way for sexual predators to take advantage of the confusion caused by this law — and endanger women and children.

H.R. 1913: Hate-Crimes Legislation (“hate-crimes” laws S.909) Could offer protection to pedophiles????

By a 249-175 vote, the liberal leadership delivered on its promise to create special protections for people based on their sexual behavior, gender identity, or disabilities. In addition to whom the bill would protect, it also adjusts where the victims are eligible for protection. In its current form, H.R. 1913 would overturn a prior rule that the victim of a hate crime had to be attacked while they were “engaged in a federally protected activity.” Under the new language, Washington can intervene in just about any local or state crime. Because the bill doesn’t define the term “sexual orientation,” some fear that pedophiles and practitioners of other bizarre sexual fetishes would try to claim protection under it.

S.B. 572: The California State Senate is poised to vote on a bill making an official “homosexual day” in every public school.

It would be called “Harvey Milk Day” in honor of the openly homosexual San Francisco Board of Supervisors member who was shot and killed in 1978 along with the city’s mayor, George Moscone. S.B. 572, which was approved 7-to-2 out of committee last week, says observances conducted on May 22 should recognize Milk’s “accomplishments as well as the contributions he made to this state” — and that “all public schools and educational institutions are encouraged to observe…and…conduct suitable commemorative exercises.”

Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com says the legislation designates just another day to indoctrinate children in the tenets of homosexuality.

According to Thomasson, parental permission for children to participate in any related activities would not be required under S.B. 572, effectively trampling on parents’ rights. He also contends the measure would “encourage public schools to positively portray to children any and all facets of homosexuality, bisexuality, and trans-sexuality — and anything else that’s ‘in the closet.’“ By Charlie Butts and Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - http://www.onenewsnow.com

How Does Gay ‘Marriage’ Affect Education?
by Jennifer Mesko, editor, http://www.citizenlink.org

‘The Supreme Court has made it clear that once a state orders gay…

Marriage advocates in California are rolling out a second television ad showing how same-sex “marriage” would change what’s taught in the classroom.

Gay activists, in their effort to defeat California’s marriage amendment (Prop. 8), are claiming homosexual “marriage” has no effect on education.

Yet, in the only other state that has legalized gay “marriage” — Massachusetts — schoolchildren are seeing some of the most egregious effects following the 2003 court decision.

In 2006, a Massachusetts teacher read the gay-friendly book “King and King” to her first-grade class, which included Joey Wirthlin. His parents, Robert and Robin Wirthlin, met with the school principal to request they be given advance notice before such material was taught to their son.

Two courts decided schools are not required to inform parents in advance of teaching about same-sex relationships. On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal.

“The Supreme Court has made it clear that once a state orders gay ‘marriage,’ public schools are going to be teaching about gay ‘marriage,’ ” said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage “There is no parental opt-out.”

Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Spreads through Northeast
by Jennifer Mesko, editor, http://www.citizenlink.org

‘This is a divisive and polarizing effort driven by the need to play to the Democrats’ donor base.’

The New York State Assembly voted Tuesday to legalize same-sex “marriage.” Thankfully, the legislation faces an uphill battle in the state Senate.

In New Hampshire, the Legislature has sent a similar bill to Gov. John Lynch, despite a recent state survey that found 64 percent of respondents agreed that “marriage between one man and one woman should be the only legal definition of marriage.”

Brian Brown, executive director for the National Organization for Marriage, said it’s clear the people of New Hampshire are not clamoring for same-sex “marriage.”

“This is a divisive and polarizing effort driven by the need to play to the Democrats’ donor base, not the will of the people,” he said. “How much of a role did out-of-state money, and national pressure, play in getting New Hampshire politicians to ignore the voters? It’s a legitimate question.”

Last week, Maine Gov. John Baldacci signed legislation making the state the fifth to allow same-sex “marriage.”

A “people’s veto” is in the works in Maine; it allows voters to place an issue on the ballot.

Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont and Iowa also allow homosexual “marriage.” The California Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on that state’s marriage-protection amendment, which was approved by voters in November.

Jenny Tyree, marriage analyst at Focus on the Family Action, said too many lawmakers are ignoring the needs of the current and future citizens of their states.

“The purpose of marriage — attaching men and women to each other and to children — may sound old-fashioned to modern ears, but societies cannot thrive by undermining the best family structure for raising the next generation.

“The definition of marriage is most secure in the hands of the voters.”

Gay Activist Tim Gill and Friends Claim Victory in 106 Races
by Jennifer Mesko, editor

For years, homosexual multi-millionaire Tim Gill and his like-minded friends have shrewdly targeted key legislative races to defeat candidates who support traditional marriage and family values.

In 2004, Gill and his friends poured millions into Gill’s home state of Colorado and gave control of the Legislature to those favoring the homosexual agenda. In 2006, they expanded, targeting 70 key races in Colorado and other states and winning an astonishing 50.This year was no different.

In addition to investing millions to — unsuccessfully — fight marriage amendments in Arizona, California and Florida, Gill and like-minded contributors supported candidates in at least 147 state races and won 106 of them. Having personally poured more than $150 million into homosexual advocacy, Gill has said his mission is to “punish the wicked” — those who stand in the way of his gay agenda.

Protecting Marriage to Protect Children
by David Blankenhorn

Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving. But in all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood.

Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children.

In this sense, marriage is a gift that society bestows on its next generation. Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood — biological, social and legal — into one pro-child form: the married couple. Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other.

These days, because of the gay marriage debate, one can be sent to bed without supper for saying such things. But until very recently, almost no one denied this core fact about marriage. Summing up the cross-cultural evidence, the anthropologist Helen Fisher in 1992 put it simply: “People wed primarily to reproduce.” The philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell, certainly no friend of conventional sexual morality, was only repeating the obvious a few decades earlier when he concluded that “it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution.”

Marriage is society’s most pro-child institution. In 2002 — just moments before it became highly unfashionable to say so — a team of researchers from Child Trends, a nonpartisan research center, reported that “family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage.”

All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other.

For these reasons, children have the right, insofar as society can make it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world. The foundational human rights document in the world today regarding children, the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically guarantees children this right. The last time I checked, liberals like me were supposed to be in favor of internationally recognized human rights, particularly concerning children, who are typically society’s most voiceless and vulnerable group. Or have I now said something I shouldn’t?

Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him. Every single one. Moreover, losing that right will not be a consequence of something that at least most of us view as tragic, such as a marriage that didn’t last, or an unexpected pregnancy where the father-to-be has no intention of sticking around. On the contrary, in the case of same-sex marriage and the children of those unions, it will be explained to everyone, including the children, that something wonderful has happened!

For me, what we are encouraged or permitted to say, or not say, to one another about what our society owes its children is crucially important in the debate over initiatives like California’s Proposition 8, which would reinstate marriage’s customary man-woman form. Do you think that every child deserves his mother and father, with adoption available for those children whose natural parents cannot care for them? Do you suspect that fathers and mothers are different from one another? Do you imagine that biological ties matter to children? How many parents per child is best? Do you think that “two” is a better answer than one, three, four or whatever? If you do, be careful. In making the case for same-sex marriage, more than a few grown-ups will be quite willing to question your integrity and goodwill. Children, of course, are rarely consulted.

The liberal philosopher Isaiah Berlin famously argued that, in many cases, the real conflict we face is not good versus bad but good versus good. Reducing homophobia is good. Protecting the birthright of the child is good. How should we reason together as a society when these two good things conflict?

Here is my reasoning. I reject homophobia and believe in the equal dignity of gay and lesbian love. Because I also believe with all my heart in the right of the child to the mother and father who made her, I believe that we as a society should seek to maintain and to strengthen the only human institution — marriage — that is specifically intended to safeguard that right and make it real for our children.

Legalized same-sex marriage almost certainly benefits those same-sex couples who choose to marry, as well as the children being raised in those homes. But changing the meaning of marriage to accommodate homosexual orientation further and perhaps definitively undermines for all of us the very thing — the gift, the birthright — that is marriage’s most distinctive contribution to human society. That’s a change that, in the final analysis, I cannot support. David Blankenhorn is president of the New York-based Institute for American Values and the author of The Future of Marriage.

Parents, the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and ‘transgender’) movement is out to recruit our children. They are out to brain wash the vulnerable minds of our young people and convincing them into experimenting, and trying “to see if you like it” kind of a thing, in a very subtle, but manipulative and calculated way. The government is backing them up and the media is supporting them a 100%.

The media is bombarding our kids with homosexual vibes. America’s major broadcast networks are upping their promotion of the homosexual movement, doubling the number of lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual scripted characters for the 2008-2009 broadcast schedule since last year. There are numerous shows on MTV, VH1 & other Cable TV channels with lots and lots of homosexual & bisexual content aimed at our young people. I would suggest keeping a close watch at what our kids are looking at on TV these days. And I would personally prohibit any shows with this type of content from being watched in my house. Let’s bring their ratings down, and make them go off the air.

The media is trying to create this positive outlook on homosexuality–trying to shove their sexual orientation down our throats–to convince us to accept their sexual orientation as normal and allow them all kinds of privileges and access to our children. We have all these gay Hollywood personalities in California, with lots of money, funding all kinds of efforts to support the gay agenda, and all the gays in government doing all they can to push legislations that would allow them more and more power to influence our children. We need to take a stand. And let these people know that we are not letting them have our children. We do not want our children involved in their homosexual lifestyle.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a daughter of mine singing “I kissed a girl and I liked it”. And can you believe that this song, “I Kissed a Girl” was the No. 1 best-selling pop track on iTunes (& the #2 best-selling track overall on iTunes) and the #1 most-downloaded iTunes Ringtone. And was also the No. 1 most-requested song at multiple Top 40 stations nationwide? This experimenting thing with homosexuality is really getting to our young people, wouldn’t you say?

And I don’t know about you, but I carried my children in the womb for 9 long months each. I have nurtured them, cared for them, fed them, clothed them, and protected them, from the moment they were born to now–they are mine! And no one, no government, no school system, no group of people, no individual has the right to indoctrinate them on sexual orientation, period.