The Massachusetts Department of Education has finally been caught with proof that it is teaching graphic and explicit sex to teenagers.

It’s been an open secret for years that the state has been encouraging teenagers — both heterosexual and homosexual — to be sexually active, but they have always denied it.

That’s the reason they "didn’t know" what their instructors were teaching to our children at the GLSEN conference at Tufts in March. They didn’t want to know.

However, they have been forced to investigate the role of its employees at that meeting which took place on March 25 where graphic instructions about homosexual sex were given at a large conference attended by teenagers, some as young as 14-years-old. The key sponsor of the event was the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network of Boston, known as GLSEN. High school students were invited to attend the meeting which was held at Tufts University. Students were bussed in from around the state.

The Department still doesn’t want to know what is being taught to our children about sex — either heterosexual or homosexual. They know it’s bad, but they also know instinctively that they’ll be better off if they don’t witness it.
The Department can’t deny its involvement this time because there is a tape recording of what was said by its employees. These are the same employees who regularly speak to schools across the state.

The officials are trying everything to keep the information from reaching the citizens. GLSEN even told the Globe that it was "illegal" to have taped the public discussions. But if that group believes that such a veiled threat is going to keep the lid on what happened at that meeting of teenagers, they have no idea how strongly the citizens feel about this type of conduct.
It’s amusing that the Globe wrote that the employees of the Department "allegedly" taught graphic sex to the students. They have run out of  "allegedlies." The proof is irrefutable.

What Will Cellucci Do?
The only question now is how will the Governor handle the truth?
What he would like to do is to keep quiet and hope the problem goes away. But he also knows that when Massachusetts News commissioned a poll of 600 residents last fall, 92% said that teenagers should not be encouraged to be sexually active.

When we questioned the Department of Education at that time, they denied that they were encouraging sexual activity for teenagers, either for heterosexuals or homosexuals.

However, we knew better. We had already revealed that high school students across the state were being offered $25 if they would discuss homosexual sex with the members of the Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Youth, also known as BAGLY. If the students did well, they were invited to a free weekend retreat in New Hampshire. BAGLY works closely with the Department of Education in "educating" our youth.
We had also published a picture of a graphic brochure on homosexual sex that is a product of the Fenway Health Center, a homosexual organization that is funded by the Massachusetts Department of Health, the City of Boston and the U.S. Public Health Service, which also works very closely with the Department of Education.

The general public was invited to the sessions at Tufts. A brochure said, "Who Should Come to the Conference?  Educators, high school and college students, parents, administrators, counselors, organizations, anyone working with young people, policy makers, religious leaders, and everyone who is committed to teaching respect for all in our schools and communities." It’s pretty difficult to say that the general public was not invited.

The Executive Director of GLSEN told the Globe, "The students were asking questions, they were assured anonymity…it would have been irresponsible not to answer them. The instructors allowed the students to talk about their issues and get good, accurate information."

You can judge the truth of that statement by reading a story of the Tufts event in our May edition, which is also available on our website. You will be shocked by what you read.

It’s difficult for some of us to forget what we have seen. At every rally which is attended by those homosexuals within the Department of Education, they always trot out some troubled teenager who stands up and tells the audience how happy he is to be a homosexual.

But at one such rally where a 16-year-old "outed" himself at the meeting for the first time, to the cheers and applause of the activists in attendance, the boy came up to my wife and me after the meeting with tears in his eyes and said, "I don’t want to be different."

It would be pretty difficult for even them to tell this boy he had to go back to this lifestyle. Even they would have a lump in their throat for a vulnerable kid who just wants to be accepted like everyone else.

A Legacy of Bill Weld
Our politicians don’t want to cause any problems with those homosexuals who are politically active and aggressive. They saw Bill Weld get elected with the help of those wealthy and influential individuals, and they understand that those activists have power and the politicians had better be nice to them.
And Paul Cellucci has learned very well. He has decided that this bloc of voters is necessary for him to stay in power.

It’s been pretty obvious that most citizens don’t agree with what’s happening. But most people believe they are the only one who disagrees. The reason for that is because much of the Massachusetts media is trained to go along with whoever controls the power-structure. Therefore, our newspapers and TV carry the impression that casual sex is wonderful.

The astounding poll about sexual activity last December was not reported in any of the media in the Commonwealth except the Boston Herald which did a fair and accurate story. Most of the media do not want the public to know this.
When we wrote a story in January about a school committee on Cape Cod which had voted against distributing condoms, we were told by the chairman of the town committee that the problem is with the state and what it mandates. But numerous calls to the Department of Education were not returned. They don’t want to talk. (However, Chairman of the Board James Peyser did give us an interview and he said that the control was in the local schools, not at the state level.)

As long as the politicians and their minions in the press can label any mother who complains as a "right-wing, homophobic hater," they can stay away from the entire mess and just let the activists do whatever they wish with our children. And that’s exactly what they have done. But their time is running out. No one can keep a lie going forever. At some point, the truth will come out.
With the great work of the Parents Rights Coalition, under the leadership of Brian Camenker and Scott Whiteman, which taped what happened at the conference on March 25, and with Jeanine Graf who reported it all on her radio show at 96.9FM, there is no longer an opportunity to deny it.
But they certainly tried to do so at first, and no one in the media reported the original apology of the Dept. of Education except for Massachusetts News and Jeanine Graf on talk radio.

And no one has reported that most homosexuals are also distraught that anyone would be treating children in this manner. We have heard for years that the homosexuals are a monolith with everyone agreeing. We all know that is not true.

The total censorship of the news that has been exercised over the last forty years appears to be ending with the advent of talk radio and the Internet. Hopefully, our President and Congressmen will no longer be watching the editorial page of the New York Times more than they listen to the wishes of the citizens.

But the work of the citizens is never done in a democracy.

Gov. Cellucci and his minions in the Department of Education will now try damage control and will assure us that they have corrected all of the problems. But that will not be true unless we all continue to monitor. Those people are continuing to operate on the old-fashioned, out-of-date idea that homosexuality is decided by God at birth. Even the Boston Globe agrees that there is no gay gene. More and more data is showing that most homosexuals were molested as a child, had a poor relationship with their parents or had other problems.
Even the famed "Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit" at Johns Hopkins Medical School says that a teenager who believes he is homosexual should receive therapy. He should not be rushed off with an activist to learn "how to be a homosexual" with the type of graphic instruction that was given at this conference. How can we be so cruel to our children?

We must be assured that this cruelty to children no longer exists in our schools.

Rich Lawyers Want More "Poverty Lawyers"

The big corporate lawyers of Boston went to the State House last month in an attempt to more than triple the amount of money that is going to "poverty lawyers" in Massachusetts.

But they received a bombshell earlier in the day when the lawyers were informed that less than one in ten of the legal needs of the poor are unmet. That was reported to them by the Beacon Hill Institute which has just completed a two-year analysis by a team of economists, psychologists and lawyers.

The lawyers had been claiming that six in ten poor persons were unable to receive legal help when they needed it.

The lawyers want to increase the amount of state dollars that goes to their lawyer-friends from $7.53 million a year to $25.53 million a year. They would do it in steps over three years.

We have shown in stories about real people in Massachusetts News over the past four months that these "poverty lawyers" are doing great harm to the families of Massachusetts and causing other damage. We don’t need more of those lawyers. What we need is to defund the entire operation. It was started in the 1960s by the federal government as a part of the War on Poverty to replace the local Legal Aid lawyers. Like many of those programs which have been total failures, it is time to end this one.

The corporate lawyers who are going to Beacon Hill have a guilty conscience because they do not help any poor people. Almost all lawyers used to help poor people all of the time. Many lawyers continue to do so, but they are usually the sole practitioners or the ones in small firms. Those who are going to the legislature today are too busy making money working for their wealthy clients. Besides, most of them wouldn’t even know what the inside of a courthouse looks like.

So they want us to salve their consciences by paying for more of their friends who are the "poverty lawyers." And besides, it makes them look good to be so concerned about those "less fortunate."

But it goes even deeper than that. Our Supreme Judicial Court is working closely with these lawyers in what is an unethical — and probably unconstitutional ­ problem for the Court. It should not be working closely with any group of lawyers which is going to appear before it or any other court in the state. These "poverty lawyers" are chosen and paid by the SJC even though they appear in their courts every day. These "poverty lawyers" will choose person "A" as the one who they think is the "good" person who should be represented for nothing. What is the trial judge supposed to believe about person "B"? After all, the lawyer from the SJC says that person "A" should win. Is a trial judge going to go against his bosses?
This is a serious problem that someone, perhaps the federal courts, should address.

Lawyers’ Information Was Wrong
The Beacon Hill Institute said that the lawyers’ information "lacks credibility because it fails to provide any indication that its authors followed standard survey-research methods."

In particular, the study, which was performed by the "poverty lawyers" themselves, does not indicate whether:

o persons inquiring about legal services were screened for their eligibility for legal assistance or for the legitimacy of their problems,
o the tabulations excluded duplicate calls by the same caller with the same problem,
o the margin of error was sufficiently small to justify confidence in the results, or
o the calls were tabulated by trained survey researchers.
o The survey by the lawyers suffers from the following weaknesses, according to Beacon Hill:
(1)  They are based on too broad a definition of a legal need.  For example, counted as legal needs are:
o lacking phone service,
o having a roach problem,
o having an unwanted business such as a liquor store in the neighborhood,
o having to take a drug test on the job, or
o feeling dissatisfied with an employer.
(2)  The surveys make no effort to determine whether a person indicating a legal need is willing to invest the personal time and effort (e.g., gathering documents, testifying) that are required in obtaining any legal remedy.
(3)  The surveys ignore the fact that only a small fraction of the people surveyed (12% in one prominent study) list cost as the reason for not hiring a lawyer.
(4)  There is the presumption that every need requires a lawyer, ignoring the wide array of free alternative resources available, particularly from government.

Beacon Hill recommended that the state: commission a new survey to reassess the incidence of unmet legal needs among the poor in Massachusetts; impose guidelines on the receipt of MLAC funds similar to the 1996 federal guidelines imposed by Congress on the LSC; and enhance public oversight and disclosure of MLAC-funded activities.

The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization that applies state-of-the-art economic methods to the analysis of current public policy issues.  The study’s overview is available at http://www.beaconhill.org.  To obtain the full study, phone 617-573-8750.

Let the People Vote on Vouchers

Speaker Thomas M. Finneran should be applauded for the House vote in favor of holding a debate about the citizen petition to end the ban on funding of private schools.

Instead, liberal Arlington Democrat James Marzilli condemned him for "abusing the democratic process" in order to "subsidize private and religious schools."

The proposal from the citizens would not "subsidize private and religious schools."  It would simply allow the legislature to consider proposals to reimburse citizens who choose not to send their children to government schools.

Marzilli wants to keep Massachusetts children in the prison of public education which, despite a huge increase in spending during ten years of "education reform," has shown itself incapable of improvement.
Here is how the "subsidy" is really working at the present time:  All of the taxpayers are forced to subsidize the corrupt and incompetent system that keeps the Massachusetts Teacher Association in business.  Then the MTA members pay to re-elect Marzilli and other liberals, and they keep the system going.

Over 80,000 citizens signed the petition to change the constitution, and a majority of citizens would have to approve a referendum.  A recent poll by the Pioneer Institute shows that a majority of Massachusetts citizens support the idea of private school vouchers, with support from every racial, income, and geographic group.  Governor Cellucci also supports vouchers.
Under the control of Senate President Thomas Birmingham, the constitutional convention rejected Finneran’s proposal to debate the measure, but proponents say they will try again when the convention reconvenes in June.
Sooner or later, the current anti-democratic system of subsidy to the failed, government-monopoly schools will end.

Yes, It Was A ‘Disgrace’ at Brandeis
Was it an overstatement when we used the word "disgrace" last month to talk about what happened at Brandeis University when Charlton Heston came to speak?

If you believe that it was, consider this.

Many people were understandably afraid to go to their auditorium and hear a person talk because over 1000 rowdy hoodlums were waiting to stop them from entering. And the administrators of the college were encouraging those hooligans to violate the freedoms of those people.

If that wasn’t a "disgrace," then it’s difficult to know what is.Editorial

Another Poverty Lawyer Damages More Children

Every time someone is treated unfairly in a courtroom, there seems to be a "poverty lawyer" lurking somewhere in the background
These Luisi children are just another example. They are being torn from their father by a poverty lawyer.

Just imagine you are Judge Stahlin and a lawyer approaches the bench and says, "Good morning, your Honor. I am attorney Ruth Diaz from the Hale and Dorr Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School. I represent Carrie Luisi."

In the first place, you know that this is someone with the imprimatur of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (your boss) because those judges are the ones who decide that this group receives state money. Plus it’s someone from Harvard Law School (which can make you famous). And it’s someone who comes with the blessing of Hale and Dorr, one of the most august law firms in the state.

What judge could hold against her?

But maybe we can turn this around to our good. Perhaps we can solve the overcrowding in our courts if we’re smart enough to realize what’s happening here. Why even bother with a trial? Why not just have the good people at the Hale and Dorr Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School simply send a note to the judge telling him that they have found that Carrie Luisi is the party with God on her side and he should decide the case in her favor. It sure would save a lot of time if we avoided the pretense of a trial.