1. Gloucester High teen pregnancy scandal - Liberals screaming: more Planned Parenthood sex ed is needed!

It's been reported across the country: Seventeen girls at Gloucester High School are expecting babies - more than four times the number of pregnancies the 1200-student school had last year, as reported first in Time Magazine.

The local media has been reacting loudly, and as usual common sense is being ignored in favor of heavy-handed political correctness.

But anybody could see that this was a disaster waiting to happen -- sponsored by tax dollars, the sex lobby, anti-parent radical school officials, and of course your Legislature.

This really is about basic human nature, and what we all know about the psychology of adolescents.

Consider that:

1. Many kids in Gloucester are particularly vulnerable, due to the terrible economic conditions there. "Families are broken," school superintendent Christopher Farmer told Time Magazine. "Many of our young people are growing up directionless."
    
2. The school has mandatory Planned Parenthood-style "comprehensive sex education" classes. Sex is simply a "choice" kids can make, which the school implicitly encourages.
    
3. Girls at the school are encouraged by school officials to get free condoms and birth control pills (without parents' knowledge) at a nearby "clinic".
    
4. The school maintains an on-campus day-care center for girls who have babies, which the school says it's "proud" of. "Strollers mingle seamlessly in school hallways among cheerleaders and junior ROTC," observes Time Magazine. There is no stigma - girls are applauded for not letting pregnancy interfere with their normal lives.
    
5. The school gives free pregnancy tests to any girl that requests it - also without parents' knowledge. (The psychological message that this sends to kids is unmistakable.)

We've seen what happens

We know of no school district anywhere where these kinds of things were introduced into the schools because of parents demanding them. They are ALWAYS brought in by the sex-ed industry with a heavy dose of propaganda and intimidation against anyone who questions them.

And in every school district where "comprehensive sex ed" is brought in, the sex-related problems always get bigger, not smaller. It's the honest debate and free exchange of ideas that get stifled. And we're only now understanding the long-term psychological effects of introducing sexual issues to the younger children.

The angry liberal knee-jerk reaction

The reaction to this tragic situation by the media and the left -- led by the ultra-liberal Boston Globe -- has been predictable. It's an angry (and logically-challenged) diatribe that we need MORE Planned-Parenthood style comprehensive sex teaching in the schools, not LESS.

Earlier this week, the Globe prominently published this letter from a pro-sex-ed child psychologist. It sums up the attitude of "progressives" very well:

"[T]he United States leads all industrialized Western nations in rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. This epidemic is fueled by inaccurate sexual information, lack of meaningful discussion with youth about sex, poor contraceptive services, and families, schools, and communities that are ambivalent about sex and disconnected from the real-life experiences of teens. . . "
Read the entire letter here.

Then, this morning, the Globe followed it up with an editorial, which goes further:

"The [high school] clinic's partner, Northeast Health System of Beverly, also failed by not promoting access to birth control, including condoms, at the clinic, where the students' confidentiality could be assured. One hospital administrator was quoted worrying about liability should a teenager suffer ill health effects from taking birth control pills. But pregnancy is a greater health risk to a teenage girl than birth control medication."
Read entire editorial here.

This is pure lunacy, of course. But it's that angry self-righteous attitude from liberals and the sex-ed lobby that parents are up against.

Abstinence education?

Some pro-family groups are touting abstinence education as the answer. We've heard positive things about abstinence education. But like a lot of parents, we think it's probably better if the school bureaucrats get completely out the business of discussing sex with kids.

But in any case, whether you do or don't have abstinence education, the real battle is getting the poisonous "comprehensive sexuality" and all its entrails OUT of the school systems and OUT of our children's lives. At the very least, parents should have complete control of what happens to their children - without secrecy, intimidation, or deceit. Until that happens, this will continue and likely get worse.

As good as abstinence education might be, why should it "compete" with the powerful, pervasive Planned Parenthood propaganda? How effective is that?

The bigger battle . . .

This is fundamentally a war of utopian "progressives" and powerful special-interest lobbyists against parents and vulnerable children. They are angry, aggressive, and willing do anything. As long as they are in the schools, children will suffer.

This is the real fight we're in.

The gruesome and bizarre photos which we recently posted from the June 7 "Transgender Pride" march (during Gay Pride Week) have shocked people across the country. (As usual neither the mainstream media nor any of the politicians do not want to address any of this.)

We've now posted the video of the parade and related events from that day in Northampton.  This 18-minute video is a taste of what it was like being there.

Hear the speakers talk about their transgender experiences, including a mother of a "transman" - a daughter who "became" a man. And much more. (You can watch it - at least you didn't have to actually be there!)

Here's the link directly to the VIDEO of the parade.

And as we've been saying - there's still much more to come from "Gay Pride Week."

3. Boston Globe gives boost to homosexual lobby's challenger to Sen. Scott Brown with fawning article. But our money's still on Brown.

Usually when an unknown person with no political experience decides to run against a well-known incumbent state senator, no one pays much attention, especially in June before the November election.

So on Thursday, when the Boston Globe's west regional edition had a big front-page puff-piece article on Sara Orozco's challenge to Sen. Scott Brown (R-Wrentham), we could smell something rotten. Actually, the headline said it all: "Gay challenger for Senate seat takes wider view."

Under normal conditions, Orozco, a Needham psychologist, would be ignored by everyone. But the homosexual movement (and by extension, the Boston Globe) passionately hates Sen. Brown.  So they recruited Orozco to run.

And the homosexual group MassEquality is raising money and organizing heavily to defeat Sen. Brown.  We won't be surprised to see some big Tim Gill money finding its way into this. Quotes from Matt McTighe, political director of MassEquality, and even Laura Esquivel, senior vice president for political affairs with the national Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, run through the article. Our guess is that there are enough gay activists working at the Globe to guarantee we'll be seeing more of these articles before November.

Article: Boston Globe 6/26/08:
"Gay challenger for Senate seat takes wider view"

Brown willing to stand up for principle

Sen. Brown's major sin from the gay lobby's standpoint was voting for the Marriage Amendment. But he also opposed state-funded sex-change operations for prisoners. And he supports Jessica's Law which would give mandatory prison sentences to child molesters. To top it off, Sen. Brown really irritated the Bay Windows crowd by condemning vulgar sexual statements by local high school students. So in the eyes of the homosexual movement, Brown's got to go at any cost.

Gay lobby vs pro-family: not a great track record

But it won't be a cakewalk for them. Four years ago in the special election they ran Angus McQuilkin, now executive director of Planned Parenthood, against Brown. The gay lobby put an enormous effort into it, but were unable to beat Brown, who is both popular and in-tune with the district.

In fact, despite their swagger, the homosexual lobby has an abysmal record of unseating pro-family incumbents. They've tried several times over the years and failed. Granted, in 2004, Carl Sciortino was able to get by Rep. Vinnie Ciampa in the Democratic primary, but that's because Vinnie wasn't paying attention and didn't campaign very hard. And even with that, the gay lobby had to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to pull it off and only beat Vinnie by 94 votes. But in every other direct challenge -- pro-homosexual challenger vs pro-family incumbent -- the incumbent won, even when lots of out-of-state homosexual money and volunteers came in to help.

But still - Scott Brown still needs everyone's help, and we are encouraging people to vigorously support his campaign. Let's give the special-interests another defeat!

As the Globe's article observes, "Orozco said that protecting gay rights is one of her top four priorities, along with healthcare, education, and the economy."

Right. Just what we need.

You can contact Sen. Brown via his website: www.scottbrown.com/
 

This is your movement!  Our funding comes from individuals. Please consider a donation.

Donations can also be mailed to: MassResistance, PO Box 1612, Waltham, MA 02454
ALL donations are confidential. MassResistance does not sell or lend any of its lists.

Contact us if you want to get involved.

Also, check out the MassResistance blog (for even more in-depth coverage)!