Mass Resistance is reporting that lesbian judge Barbara Lenk has been confirmed, in a 5-3 vote, for the Massachusetts SJC:
"On Wednesday the elected Governor’s Council met to vote on the nomination of Barbara Lenk to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. As MassResistance has reported and documented, Lenk is an 'out' lesbian activist with troubling record of activism. She brings a stated philosophy that judges can 'evolve' the law, and an apparent intent to promote social change from the bench. Governor Patrick, who owes the homosexual lobby for its tireless support in his election, touted his nomination of Lenk as an important 'first'....Lenk's nomination was an immediate red flag for conservatives. Knowing that, the liberal establishment even more fiercely pushed her confirmation. Their fear tactics came out in force. If you mentioned anything about Lenk's 'sexual orientation' then you were an ignorant bigot. That's been the public party line and it was largely effective.
Thus, just about all the Massachusetts pro-family groups stayed on the sidelines. Only MassResistance, the Catholic Action League, and Joe Ureneck’s fatherhood groups came to the hearing to testify, or participated in any meaningful way. And in the media, only Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr was unafraid to tell the truth. Talk show host Jeff Katz was also vocal in opposition to Lenk, but he was careful to state that her 'sexual orientation' didn’t bother him at all.
As we reported, the pro-family people who came to the public hearing were straightforward in their concerns. The testimony generally centered around (1) Lenk's pro-gay judicial record and her apparent bias toward the homosexual movement; (2) her public self-identification as an 'out' lesbian in a same-sex 'marriage' (thus supporting with the Goodridge decision) – and how that will be used in the public schools and elsewhere; (3) her pro-activist judicial philosophy; (4) concerns about her position on fathers' rights; and (5) her apparent support for the homosexual-themed (and anti-Semitic) play 'Falsettos' produced at a local school.
And of course, it's this same Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that gave us the 'same-sex marriage' Goodridge decision -- the gold standard for radical judicial activism. It shouldn't be considered a surprise that these things would be on peoples' minds. These seemed to be reasonable concerns regarding a judge who would be a final guardian of the Commonwealth’s civil rights. But members of the Governor’s Council obviously saw that differently. At the public hearing, a few of them took the unprecedented action of berating, insulting, and badgering the pro-family witnesses. As we reported, it was terrible. Then on Wednesday, just before the vote, two others stood up to speak about the upcoming vote and continued that bizarre and offensive behavior...Councilor Marilyn Devaney made the outrageous statement that people with pro-family values on homosexuality should not be allowed to speak at all. Devaney told the Council and the attendees: 'I am not responsible for the public who spoke at that hearing. I don't know them. If I was presiding I would have gaveled out of order speakers who used demeaning and inappropriate language.'
Demeaning and inappropriate language from members of the public? That, of course, is a reference to the testimony of pro-family speakers that day. Well, excuse us for having traditional values and voicing our concerns about people who will be judges over us. And obviously Councilor Devaney has some issues with the First Amendment. This is among the most offensive things we've ever heard a public official say, and we’ve heard a lot. And what about the Councilors who actually were demeaning and inappropriate to us? Apparently not a problem for Devaney. Devaney also said that because the actions of people like us other qualified homosexuals were afraid to apply for judgeships, and that bothers her greatly.
But then Jennie Caissie, the newly elected Republican, was equally as offensive. She stood up right after Devaney and said, 'I want to begin by thanking Judge Lenk for her candid testimony at the hearing, for her professionalism, and her stoic presentation in the light of some very unprofessional and irrelevant questioning. I rise because I want to set the basis for my vote and distinguish myself from those irrelevant and ignorant questions.' 'Irrelevant and ignorant?' Again, this is incredibly outrageous. What arrogance. This woman, like Devaney, has no business being an elected official. The 2012 elections can’t come fast enough."
As I said here:
The Homosexual Hate Movement is indeed totalitarian. It seeks to impose its agenda and to punish those who refuse to accept or condone illicit same-sex relationships. For example, British and Canadian homosexual activists want to punish the African State of Malawi because it will not recognize same-sex liaisons...Radical homosexual activists are engaged in a psychological attack in the form of propaganda aimed at those who are opposed to homosexuality. Their goal is to convert the mind and the will. As homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen explain in their book "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90s," 'Desensitization aims at lowering the intensity of antigay emotional reactions to a level approximating sheer indifference; Jamming attempts to blockade pr counteract the rewarding 'pride in prejudice'..by attaching to homohatred a pre-existing, and punishing, sense of shame in being a bigot....Both Desensitization and Jamming...are mere preludes to our highest - though necessarily very long-range - goal, which is Conversion. It isn't enough that antigay bigots should become confused about us, or even indifferent to us - we are safest, in the long run, if we can actually make them like us.
Conversion aims at just this...By Conversion we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life, without which no truly sweeping social change can occur. We mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack , in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.' (p. 153).
The Homosexual Hate Movement is, by its own admission, engaged in psychological warfare through the use of propaganda to convert people to its agenda. And even that this conversion is 'profoundly threatening to the American way of life.' And when these radical activists fail to get their way, as we've witnessed in California and in other parts of the country, they can become violent. Indeed, this hate movement will use and all means - including economic sanctions - to impose its ideology. And that is totalitarianism."
Showing posts with label SJC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SJC. Show all posts
Sunday, May 08, 2011
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Something else to thank Holy Cross College for...
Today's Sunday Telegram (Worcester Telegram & Gazette) is running a story by Denise Lavoie on the retirement of Justice John Greaney (an SJC judge). This article is subtitled, "Holy Cross pointed Greaney to profession."
Lavoie writes, "Justice John Greaney didn't write the Supreme Judicial Court's landmark ruling making Massachusetts the first state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage, but five years later, a passage from his concurring opinion is sometimes used by gay couples in their wedding ceremonies. 'We share a common humanity and participate together in the social contract that is the foundation of our Commonwealth,' Greaney wrote. 'Simple principles of decency dictate that we extend...full acceptance, tolerance and respect. We should do so because it is the right thing to do.'"
Greaney, the son of an Irish immigrant, "said he knew he wanted to be a judge since his days at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, where his professors 'kept stressing that you have to do something with your life and contribute to society and the well-being of others.'"
And Justice Greaney believes that he has contributed to "the well-being of others"? To the common good? The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, had this to say:
"The inevitable consequences of legal recognition of homosexual unions would be the redefinition of marriage, which would become, in its legal status, an institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to homosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. If, from the legal standpoint, marriage between a man and a woman were to be considered just one possible form of marriage, the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good. By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane analogous to that of marriage and the family, the State acts arbitrarily and in contradiction with its duties." (No. 8).
Yes indeed, Holy Cross is creating quite a name for itself. Just recently, this institution spent a week promoting homosexuality.
Recall the teaching of Pope Pius XI in his famous Encyclical "On Christian Marriage":
"First of all, let this remain the unchanged and unshakable foundation: Matrimony was neither established nor restored by man but by God. It has been protected, strengthened, and elevated not by the laws of men, but by those of God, the author of human nature, and of Christ who restored that same nature. Consequently, these laws cannot be changed according to men's pleasure, nor by any agreement of the spouses themselves that is contrary to these laws. This is the teaching of Sacred Scripture (see Gen 1:27; 2:22f.; Mt 19:3ff.; Eph 5:23ff.); this is the constant, universal tradition of the Church; this is the solemn definition of the holy Council of Trent, which in the words of Sacred Scripture teaches and reasserts that the permanent and indissoluble bond of matrimony, its unity and strength, have their origin in God."
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Nos. 1603-1605, explain marriage in the order of creation:
"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage." The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."
God who created man out of love also calls him to love the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love. Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'"
Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone." The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help. "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."
Pray for Justice Greaney and the College of the Holy Cross.
Lavoie writes, "Justice John Greaney didn't write the Supreme Judicial Court's landmark ruling making Massachusetts the first state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage, but five years later, a passage from his concurring opinion is sometimes used by gay couples in their wedding ceremonies. 'We share a common humanity and participate together in the social contract that is the foundation of our Commonwealth,' Greaney wrote. 'Simple principles of decency dictate that we extend...full acceptance, tolerance and respect. We should do so because it is the right thing to do.'"
Greaney, the son of an Irish immigrant, "said he knew he wanted to be a judge since his days at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, where his professors 'kept stressing that you have to do something with your life and contribute to society and the well-being of others.'"
And Justice Greaney believes that he has contributed to "the well-being of others"? To the common good? The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, had this to say:
"The inevitable consequences of legal recognition of homosexual unions would be the redefinition of marriage, which would become, in its legal status, an institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to homosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. If, from the legal standpoint, marriage between a man and a woman were to be considered just one possible form of marriage, the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good. By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane analogous to that of marriage and the family, the State acts arbitrarily and in contradiction with its duties." (No. 8).
Yes indeed, Holy Cross is creating quite a name for itself. Just recently, this institution spent a week promoting homosexuality.
Recall the teaching of Pope Pius XI in his famous Encyclical "On Christian Marriage":
"First of all, let this remain the unchanged and unshakable foundation: Matrimony was neither established nor restored by man but by God. It has been protected, strengthened, and elevated not by the laws of men, but by those of God, the author of human nature, and of Christ who restored that same nature. Consequently, these laws cannot be changed according to men's pleasure, nor by any agreement of the spouses themselves that is contrary to these laws. This is the teaching of Sacred Scripture (see Gen 1:27; 2:22f.; Mt 19:3ff.; Eph 5:23ff.); this is the constant, universal tradition of the Church; this is the solemn definition of the holy Council of Trent, which in the words of Sacred Scripture teaches and reasserts that the permanent and indissoluble bond of matrimony, its unity and strength, have their origin in God."
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Nos. 1603-1605, explain marriage in the order of creation:
"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage." The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."
God who created man out of love also calls him to love the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love. Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'"
Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone." The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help. "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."
Pray for Justice Greaney and the College of the Holy Cross.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
