Our article on homosexuality has created a “firestorm of controversy across the state.”  That’s what the viewers of Channel 5 were told by Chet Curtis in his lead story on Thursday night.

Channel 7 said it was their “Top Story” of the night.

All of the television stations in Boston reported about the article, as did the major newspapers and talk-shows.

We learned a lot from this experience, including the following:

— We have apparently started a dialogue with a lot of people.  We will have a meeting with the homosexual newspaper, Bay Windows, on Tuesday.

— The $1,000,000 in state money has to stop. These dollars are being used to send homosexual adults into local schools to advocate the practice of homosexuality.

— Most people agree with the article.  We hit a “nerve,” they say.  But most are reluctant to get “involved.”  One anonymous caller told me, “Most people don’t know what the children are being taught.  Thanks for making other parents aware.   Thank you!  Thank you!  Thank you!”

— The strategy of the homosexual activists has been to avoid the main issues in the article and stop all debate by filibustering any insignificant detail they can find.
 
— The press was fair in its reporting with the exception of WBUR, which is the local radio station of PBS.

— Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination is a large part of the problem.  We will not solve the problem until we stop its authoritarian power.

$1,000,000 In State Money

The practice of using state money to promote the practice of homosexuality was started by Bill Weld who appropriated $250,000 to provide “support” for homosexual students across the state.   Paul Cellucci has quadrupled this amount to $1,000,000 for the current year.

What they mean by “support” is telling students that a homosexual lifestyle is simply another choice, just like deciding between Pepsi or Coke.

We can eliminate this program from next year’s budget if enough people become involved, according to Brian Camenker of Newton, President of the Parents’ Rights Coalition of Massachusetts.

It is ironic that in my hometown of Sherborn, a “Coffeehouse” was sponsored by the “Gay/Straight Alliance” of Dover-Sherborn High School last Monday night.   The teenagers invited included children from the middle school, plus students from Framingham, Holliston, Medfield, Newton North and South High Schools and other surrounding towns that have an Alliance.

This was done despite the fact that there is no student who is “openly gay,” according to one of the students, but, “It’s a really homophobic school,” she reported.

This Sherborn Gay/Straight Alliance was started in 1996 with a grant of $1,800 from the state.   “They were really into giving kids money for this sort of thing,” the founder of the group said.

If you wish to help The Parents Rights Coalition of Massachusetts eliminate this money, you can reach them at PO Box 175, Newton, MA 02466.  Tel 781-433-7106.

Most People Agree

Although most people agree with the article, they wish that the subject would just “go away” without bothering their lives.   Some resent that I have awakened them to the problem.

The great majority of people who disagreed with me were homosexual activists, mostly at Bay Windows.

Since we mailed a printed copy to every resident in my hometown of Sherborn as an informal focus group, much of the reaction was from there.  It was amazing that of the few people who disagreed, most admitted that they never read the article.   For example, the Metrowest Daily News announced on Saturday that it had found three persons in Sherborn who did not like the article.  One was “annoyed” and “threw it aside.”  Another “looked at it quickly” and said, “Let’s toss it.”   The third was a doctor, who called it “hate mail” and told the paper that it is “unsubstantiated science.”    Did he read it?   How can he say that the American Society of Human Genetics engages in “unsubstantiated science?”

The Counter-Strategy of the Activists

I was disappointed that I could not get a discussion about the main issues on the talk shows or in the press.

 The activists hope that if they can steer the discussion into the periphery, everyone will become bored and turn away.   All they would talk about when I appeared on the talk-shows and elsewhere was about one researcher I had cited who says that homosexuals live a short life. They wanted to waste all of our valuable time arguing about whether he was credible.  Do we even need research on this point?   As I pointed out, does anyone disagree that many homosexuals have been dying?  If they aren’t dying, why have we been hearing over so many years that they are?

They only wanted to avoid any debate.

The Press Was Fair

I was amazed at the fairness of the press.   I have only two complaints.

— Many of them called the article, “anti-gay,” which, of course, is not true.  I state very clearly that it is the practice with which I have a problem.  I believe it is a foolish one.  We have no right to tell teenagers that they should experiment with a lifestyle that is compulsive and addictive.  I have no quarrel with the people who practice it, although I believe they are foolish.

 — No one reported what it was that stirred me to write the article.   It was  because of the irresponsible story in New Bedford’s daily, the Standard-Times, which attempted to blame all of the evils in the world on Christianity, including the murder of Matthew Shepard in Wyoming.   Also, no one reported how I showed that the Globe and the Herald are presenting this subject in a biased manner.

— The only medium with which I have a complaint is the PBS radio station, WBUR.  They really “set-me-up” on their noon-time show.  They were able to do so because they taped the interview and then edited it as they wished.  After warning me that I had to talk fast because they had only six minutes for me and the homosexual guest who opposed me, the host then proceeded to play a radio tape from one of the many psychologists whom I had cited in my 56 footnotes.   Although I complained about the “set-up” and the fact that the host had taken a large part of my time by playing the tape and asking me to respond to an irrelevant point, he edited out my complaint, making it look as though I was unable to respond.  The entire experience was one of deception.  The host appeared to be a nice person and seemed to regret having done it.  Perhaps he is under pressure from management to “get” the conservatives.

Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination

I have just read a book by a bona fide Massachusetts liberal, Attorney Harvey Silverglate, who may disagree with everything I say, but who is passionate about my right to say it.   He writes better than I that we are losing our freedom of speech.   He limits his thesis to our universities.

“[U]niversities have become the enemy of a free society, and the time has come to hold these institutions to account,” is the core of his message.

 He limits his book to our colleges, whereas I attempt to show in a book I wrote last May that it is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that has backfired and damaged our entire nation.   It has become especially harmful to freedom of speech, as well as to blacks and women.   My book was praised by Walter Williams, the economist and author, and by Alan Keyes, a Presidential candidate, and by many other scholars.

Although my book is limited to the federal law which does not give a preference to homosexuals, the law in Massachusetts does give them preferences and quotas.   It is these laws, both federal and state, which are severely limiting our freedom of speech and damaging our media.

Silverglate’s book is The Shadow University:  The Betrayal of Liberty on America’s Campuses and mine is Freedom Will Conquer Racism and Sexism.   Both are available on amazon.com and in any bookstore.