Posts

Gay journalists plan to disrupt 2014 Olympics

Mass Resistance reports:

Homosexual activists in the U.S. are working with media groups, “out LGBT athletes,” and both the US and Canadian Olympic hockey teams in a secret plan to smuggle rainbow flags, homosexual propaganda, etc. into Russia. Their intent is to disrupt the 2014 Winter Olympics with homosexual symbolism, according to a presenter at the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Convention in Boston on August 24. The planned disruption is a retaliation by the homosexual movement to Russia’s recent ban on the public promotion of homosexuality.

They are also talking about “utilizing diplomatic channels” to help smuggle the homosexual flags and other materials into Russia.

Patrick Burke, co-founder of the You Can Play Project, a campaign to “end homophobia in sports,” also referred to plans for athletes to wave rainbow flags on awards podiums and at the closing ceremonies. Burke told the group that “we can’t talk about that publicly” but “there’s a lot going on behind the scenes.”.

MassResistance was present and recorded the presentation.

The Park Plaza Hotel in downtown Boston, during the conference.

Russia’s ban on public promotion of homosexuality

The 2014 Winter Olympics will be held in Sochi, Russia on February 7-23, 2014. This past June, as MassResistance reported, Russia’s parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill which bans the promotion of “non-traditional sexual relations” to minors, and which also includes bans on “gay pride” rallies or other public promotion of “homosexual propaganda.”

The Russian government has made it clear that the ban also covers participants and attendees of the 2014 Olympics. According to Burke, Russian authorities have decided to preemptively confiscate rainbow flags and pins at airports.

Remarks made at “Out on the Playing Field” session at conference

The National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) is a powerful national organization of homosexual journalists from major television news, newspapers, radio, and more. Their annual conference was held August 22-25, 2013 at the Boston Park Plaza Hotel.

Burke spoke at a conference session titled, “Game Changer: Out on the Playing Field and In the Press Box,” Its description: “Hear from sportswriters and athletes who can tell you what homophobia they still see in sports and where there are areas of real improvement.” Burke apparently thought he was talking to an all-“gay” audience, and was surprisingly candid about what he’s been doing to help organize the disruption at the upcoming Olympics.

Patrick Burke prepares to address his session at the NLGJA conference. Photo courtesy of Mass Resistance.

“Rainbow flag on the podium” and more

Here is what Patrick Burke said in his presentation about the plan to infiltrate the Olympic Games and embarrass the Russian government:

We’re going to have three weeks of sustained media presence there. We are going to have out LGBT athletes there. We are going to have very vocal and visible allies there.

We’ve spoken with the Canadian and U.S. hockey teams. We’re going to be doing work with both of those teams.

The frustrating part right now is we can’t talk about that publicly because if you talk about it publicly, the Russians don’t let you in the country. So when everyone keeps asking us “What are you going to do when you get there? What are you going to do when you get there?” and we keep having to say “We can’t tell you.”

The Russians have said they’ll confiscate rainbow flags if you try and bring them in your regular luggage. They’ve said they’ll confiscate pins. We are talking about utilizing diplomatic channels to get things into the country.

There’s a lot going on behind the scenes that will frustrate people because it won’t be made public until you see an athlete on a medal stand or at closing ceremonies . . .

There’s two types of backlash that we’re concerned about.

One is government. Where a journalist or athlete whoever it might be, is arrested or is, you know, fined, is deported. Not that anyone wants to stay in Russia if the Olympics are over. That’s certainly the type of backlash that we’re concerned about.

The second is non-governmental groups. We looked into securing a pride house in Sochi. One of my very good friends basically runs the Continental Hockey League and he knows every Russian billionaire out there. We said what would it take to get a pride house? He said he’d ‘need security.’ Well yeah, get some security guards. He said ‘no, someone would shoot it up.’ He said ‘you would need ex-KGB to secure it. You guys can’t afford that.’ Well probably not. So there’s concern on my end about non-governmental groups taking matters into their own hands.

I think the athletes are going to be safe. I think if you see an athlete or a journalist do something, unless it’s excessively provocative — and I use that term from the Russian point of view; I wouldn’t consider anything excessive — you’re going to see athletes deported. I don’t think you’re going to see fines. I don’t think you’re going to see arrests. I think you’re going to see, someone waves a rainbow flag on the podium; you go right from the podium to an airplane. You get sent home.

AUDIO: LISTEN to the above comments HERE.

(NOTE: Open recording and video taping of the conference and its sessions were allowed. Some sessions were recorded and/or videoed by several people.)

A diplomatic embarrassment to Americans?

The Russian government’s efforts to protect children and society has attracted support from pro-family organizations around the world, and also from countries such as Nigeria and Uganda who are also dealing with these issues.

If this effort is successful, it will be an embarrassment not only to the Russian government — which is working hard to have a clean, wholesome atmosphere for its Olympic games — but certainly to many Americans, given that American corporations, American athletes, and possibly even our government would be  also involved in the Olympics.

The pro-homosexual Obama Administration has already complained loudly about Russia’s new law. And President Obama himself, while visiting Russia this past week, in a purposeful affront to the Russian government met with Russian homosexual activists in St. Petersburg, along with his national security advisor and the US Ambassador to Russia. So it would not be surprising Obama had the US diplomatic corps involved with this, too.

The international fallout from this, given the wide range of those involved, could be considerable.

Florida Churches changing bylaws after gay marriage ruling

Prophecy News Watch reports:

Worried they could be sued by gay couples, some churches are changing their bylaws to reflect their view that the Bible allows only marriage between one man and one woman.

Although there have been lawsuits against wedding industry businesses that refuse to serve gay couples, attorneys promoting the bylaw changes say they don’t know of any lawsuits against churches.

Critics say the changes are unnecessary, but some churches fear that it’s only a matter of time before one of them is sued.

“I thought marriage was always between one man and one woman, but the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said no,” said Gregory S. Erwin, an attorney for the Louisiana Baptist Convention, an association of Southern Baptist churches and one several groups advising churches to change their bylaws. “I think it’s better to be prepared because the law is changing. America is changing.”

In a June decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that defined marriage as between a man and a woman for purposes of federal law. A second decision was more technical but essentially ushered in legal gay marriage in California.

Kevin Snider is an attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute, a nonprofit legal defense group that specializes in conservative Christian issues. His organization released a model marriage policy a few years ago in response to a statewide gay marriage fight in California. Snider said some religious leaders have been threatened with lawsuits for declining to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies.

Dean Inserra, head pastor of the 1,000-member City Church Tallahassee, based in Florida, said he does not want to be alarmist, but his church is looking into how best to address the issue.

Inserra said he already has had to say no to gay friends who wanted him to perform a wedding ceremony.

“We have some gay couples that attend our church. What happens when they ask us to do their wedding?” Inserra said. “What happens when we say no? Is it going to be treated like a civil rights thing?”

Critics, including some gay Christian leaders, argue that the changes amount to a solution looking for a problem.

“They seem to be under the impression that there is this huge movement with the goal of forcing them to perform ceremonies that violate their freedom of religion,” said Justin Lee, executive director of the Gay Christian Network, a nonprofit that provides support for gay Christians and their friends and families and encourages churches to be more welcoming.

“If anyone tried to force a church to perform a ceremony against their will, I would be the first person to stand up in that church’s defense.”

Thirteen states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.

Some Christian denominations, such as the United Church of Christ, accept gay marriage. The Episcopal Church recently approved a blessing for same-sex couples, but each bishop must decide whether to allow the ceremony in his or her local diocese.

Read more.

Family Group Vows to Remind Voters Of Consequences of 296

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA— Florida Family Action has released documentation today gathered from the Duval County Supervisor of Elections office displaying how the citizens of Jacksonville voted on Florida’s Marriage Protection Amendment in 2008. The report is broken out by each Council Member’s district, showing both the precise number and percentage of voter’s voting for marriage and against the creation of new gay rights on this issue.

Not a single district had less than 59% voting in favor of the Defense of Marriage Amendment, which amended the Florida Constitution to include language to prohibit “no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.”

Percentages range from district to district, all showing a decided majority in favor of maintaining the traditional definition of marriage. Districts 1, 8, 10 and 11 had more than 70% voting in favor of the Amendment, with 78.9% of District 12’s citizens voting Yes.

John Stemberger President of Florida Family Action released the following statement today:

Jacksonville residents will not be fooled about the real intent and purpose of this ordinance. Full legalized gay marriage is the goal of its proponents. 2012-296 is just a stepping stone to that end. In every state where traditional marriage laws were overturned to allow homosexual marriages, whether by judicial decision or state legislature, proponents of gay marriage cited the collective scheme of non discrimination ordinances that created new protected classes like the one proposed in 296. Local ordinances of this nature have been consistently used as legal precedent for introducing gay marriage. Even state constitutional amendments supporting traditional marriage, like California’s recently overturned amendment, are not safe. We pledge to remind the constituents in every Council Member’s district who votes for this bill on August 15 about its true effect. It would be our hope that members of the Council will remember both the commanding vote margin in this research and the recent record lines outside of Chick fil A stores in Jacksonville this past week in support of natural marriage.

This data has been released for the information of the City Council while they are considering Ordinance 2012-296, a bill that would amend several City ordinances to add “sexual orientation, and perhaps gender identity or expression” to the listings of personal conditions or statuses which cannot be discriminated against. The ordinances proposed to be amended include Public Accommodations, Fair Housing, and others.

Voting yes on 296 would be decidedly against the will of the citizens of Jacksonville, who overwhelmingly voted to uphold the traditional definition of marriage when given the chance. The City Council may wish to consider the way their constituents voted when this similar issue was presented directly to them.