African American couple is challenging taxpayer funding of abortions in Minnesota.

Since 1995, Minnesota taxpayers have been paying for tens of thousands of abortions each year under the Doe v. Gomez Minnesota Supreme Court decision.

Below is the press release announcing the lawsuit.  The lawsuit claims the state is paying for too many abortions under even the Minnesota Supreme Court decision requiring theraupeutic abortions be paid for.  In addition, the lawsuit argues the Gomez ruling distinguishing between therapeutic and non-therapeutic abortions is unworkable.

The lawsuit also points out the disproportionate impact of the ruling on blacks.  40% of the abortions paid for by the state are on black women even though blacks constitute only 5% of Minnesota's population.  I'm told 60% of pregnancies in the black community end with an abortion.  Talk about the decimation of a racial community.  Look no further than abortion. 

The Minnesota Family Council has been working on this initiative for several years and is excited to see it moving forward.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys and allied attorneys filed suit Tuesday on behalf of two African-American taxpayers in Minnesota who are challenging the unauthorized use of state funding for elective abortions.

Minnesota can only use public funds for abortions that are defined as medically necessary, but government reporting statistics clearly demonstrate that tax dollars have paid for thousands of elective abortions for indigent women, including a disproportionate number performed on African-Americans. More than 40 percent of publicly funded abortions were carried out on African-Americans even though they account for just over 5 percent of the state’s population.

 “The critical taxpayer dollars of Minnesotans should not be used for medically unnecessary abortions, nor should such funding be used to take the lives of more African-American babies than other babies,” said lead counsel Chuck Shreffler, one of nearly 2,200 allied attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom.

“The reporting statistics are unambiguous,” added Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven H. Aden, who is co-counsel in the case. “The state is indisputably funding medically unnecessary abortions in violation of state law, and 40 percent of the abortions are being executed on African-Americans even though they make up only 5 percent of the state’s population. This lawsuit intends to stop this from continuing.”

The complaint in the case, Walker v. Jesson, was filed in the Minnesota District Court for Ramsey County, Second Judicial District.

From 1999 through 2011, Minnesota taxpayers paid for 47,095 abortions performed on indigent women, according to the Minnesota Department of Health. The data indicates that, at most, only 10,044 of these abortions were done for a “medically necessary” reason, meaning that the state paid for more than 37,000 unauthorized abortions. The statistics regarding the number of abortions performed on African-Americans also came from the Department of Health.

In the late 1970s, the Minnesota Legislature passed a statute limiting the abortions for which it would pay and prohibited taxpayer funding for elective abortions. In 1995, the Minnesota Supreme Court struck down the statute and ruled in Doe v. Gomez that the state cannot withhold state funding for medically necessary abortions. The ruling made clear, however, that “this court’s decision will not permit any woman eligible for medical assistance to obtain an abortion ‘on demand.’”

“The Department of Health statistics show that the state is going far beyond what the Minnesota Supreme Court required in that decision,” Shreffler explained.

The Minnesota Family Council, which advises state lawmakers on family-related matters and supports the lawsuit, says it believes the new facts provide the courts with a good reason to reconsider the public abortion funding mandate in Doe v. Gomez.

Religion and Politics...Media loves it

The Sunday Star Tribune front page lead story was "When campaign and cross unite." It dealt with the MFC's efforts to promote informed voting by churchmembers, among other things. Of course, this is viewed as such a novel, almost exotic idea that it invariably garners a lot of media attention every general election cycle.

I think the ongoing media fascination with church involvement stems from the faulty notion of the separation of church and state and the postmodern mindset that faith is a purely private matter which shouldn't be promoted publicly, especially when it comes to politics. This is a historically incorrect understand of the US Constitution's Establishment Clause which was intended to keep the institutions of church and state separate in order to protect religious liberties not muzzle the expression of religious based public views and positions.

One thing which has increased interest, at least at a low level, is the effort by the Alliance Defense Fund to challenge the IRS' 1954 gag rule prohibiting churches and pastors from speaking in support or opposition to particular candidates. The rule which is seldom enforced, and when done so inconsistently, has been used to intimidate churches and pastors to remain silent on on public issues and election involvement in general. The lawsuit will either strike down the rule or force the IRS to clarify exactly what pastors and churches can and can not say and do.

I recently read about the controversy in the 1984 elections when Reagan was very outspoken on the importance of faith in our public life and Mondale argued faith was a private matter which shouldn't be brought into the public arena. This controversy is nothing new.

The mix of religious and politics are as old as the Republic. In further blog posts I'll explore some of the differing opinions among evangelicals on the proper relationship between faith and politics.

Special Session, Government Shutdown?

By Tom Prichard

With a little over four weeks until the legislature is required by the
state constitution to conclude it's work (May 22nd), most Capitol insiders
expect a special session. Governor Pawlenty has staked out a strong
position on not raising taxes and DFL leaders in the legislature have a lot
of special interest groups expecting more money and benefits. DFL Senate
has already voted to raise taxes by over $1.25 billion dollars.

So I don't expect things to be resolved by May 22. Often times governors
won't call the legislature back into session until a deal is struck. Or
Pawlenty could force them to keep working by immediately calling a special
session. The last time there was a government shutdown, the state
legislature took a lot of heat in the next election. If that were to happen
now, DFL legislators in the House could take a big hit in the 2008
elections. I think Pawlenty should hang tough. The state already has
budget surplus of over $2 billion and spending is projected to go up 9.3%
over the next two years under his budget. At a time when personal income
grew only 3.8% in the last reporting year, the legislature doesn't need to
double that in increased government spending.

UK regulations on religion

By Tom Prichard

The increasingly aggressive and militant homosexual agenda is viewed for some observers as the greatest threat to religious liberties of Christians in the West. From the push for homosexual marriage to hate crimes laws reflect efforts to eliminate public disapproval and opposition to homosexuality. An excellent example is the United Kingdom’s new Sexual Orientation Regulations which would prohibit Christian schools, services and businesses from speaking or acting negatively towards homosexuality.

A couple of examples already illustrate what this means. First, Catholic adoption agencies in England will be forced to close their doors because of its policy of not placing adoptive children with homosexual couples. British government officials view this as discriminatory, and not as common sense. If Catholic agencies won’t change, then the government can shut down their Catholic adoptive services.

Then there’s the case of the Anglican bishop in Chester, England who said that homosexuals “could and should seek medical help to ‘reorient’ themselves”. For those comments the bishop was investigated by the local police. The local police chief “advised” him that, “civic leaders ought to promote diversity – including homosexuality… in a positive manner.”

Now with the new sexual orientation regulations, religious leaders of all faiths in England are concerned that the government will be aggressively going after speech or activities of those who believe homosexuality is wrong or unhealthy. This is of immediate concern to Christians in England, but it should also be of concern to Christians in the United States where the speech and behavior of people who believe homosexual behavior is wrong and harmful is also being targeted.

MFC agrees with Rep. Greiling, sex ed curricula in public schools contains activities that are "obscene" and "bizarre"

Yesterday, Barb Anderson of MFC held a press conference that identified unhealthy sex activities contained in several sex education curricula used in public schools. In an article by Tim Budig of HometownSource, Rep. Mindy Greiling, DFL-Roseville, said, "Anderson and others bring an extreme voice to the sex education debate. The recent testimony of anti-comprehensive sex education activists before her House education committee was 'obscene' and 'bizarre.'"” “They’re way off base,” she said. Click Here to view testimony - and decide for yourself.

Well, we agree, some of the content contained in comprehensive sex ed curricula is extreme, obscene and bizarre.

We would also add - unhealthy. For example:

“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators," said Anderson, "as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus. This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”

“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.

Rep. Greiling, if Anderson's testimony is obscene it is because the material contained in the curriculum is obscene. MFC finds it "way off base" that you would resort to name-calling rather than protecting our school children from unhealthy sexual practices.

MFC and EdWatch call on legislators to reject unhealthy, anti-family, anti-parent provisions in the House K-12 education spending bill

Press Release

ST. PAUL – Two Minnesota groups jointly released a list of top reasons for legislators to reject unhealthy, anti-family, anti-parent provisions in the House K-12 education spending bill. The Minnesota Family Council and EdWatch today called on House members to reject the provisions which they call dangerous and an unwarranted government intrusion into parenting when the bill is up for a floor vote today.

Government intrusion into parenting unhealthy for families and children
Dr. Karen Effrem of EdWatch identified five different early childhood proposals that are highly objectionable. “These are nothing short of a government assault on the minds of our children and a massive takeover of parenting in the state of Minnesota,” she said. One example she listed was government setting norms for all children from birth to age five in areas like mental health, gender issues, diversity training, and environmentalism. “These have nothing to do with closing the achievement gap,” she stated.

Psychiatric screening is another area the groups highlighted. The controversial mental screening program, TeenScreen, has drawn intense public opposition. “HF6 simply hides TeenScreen by giving it a generic name to avoid the controversy,” stated Effrem, “but the author made it clear that TeenScreen is the program that will be funded. The language is intentionally misleading.”

Curricula used for comprehensive sex education unhealthy for children
Tom Prichard of Minnesota Family Council said that HF6 would force comprehensive sex education programs on all middle and high schools in the state. “This is an unhealthy proposal which will be foisted on Minnesota students in every grade from 7 through 12.”

“After reviewing several sex education curricula” added Chuck Darrell director of communications for MFC, “we are certain the instruction will lead to more teens engaging in unhealthy, dangerous forms of sexual activity like oral, anal, and even anal-oral sex. The content is graphic and offensive and even made legislators blush in legislative hearings on the bill.”

“A recent study showed an explosion in STD’s and STI’s including Chlamydia. The reason for the explosion is not abstinence. It is because children are being taught to engage in unhealthy sexual activity,” said Darrell.

“The discussion of abstinence in comprehensive sex education is merely window dressing, said Prichard. “The focus of the curriculum is use of contraceptives. In addition, marriage is not encouraged. We can’t ignore marriage when sexual activity is discussed,” he said. “No legislator should support such a program.”

“We are asking legislators to drop these intrusive provisions. If they are not dropped, legislators should reject the overall bill,” Prichard said. “Minnesota parents don’t want the state promoting programs that undermine our children’s health and well-being.”

"Responsible family life and sexuality education" provisions in HF 6 unhealthy to children

MFC Press Release

Group exposes unhealthy implications of “Responsible family life and sexuality education” provisions in HF 6

Group says teaching children to use dental dams for anal-oral sex is just one of several unhealthy activities contributing to rise in STD’s.

MINNEAPOLIS – Drawing a parallel between a recent study citing a two-fold rise in Chlamydia and sex education curricula used in public schools, a group of parents and students exposed the unhealthy activities taught to students and called upon the legislature to remove the sex education provisions from House File 6.

Barb Anderson identified three sex education curricula used in public schools including Reducing the Risk, Safer Choices, and The Educators’ Guide to Reproductive Health by the Birds & Bees Project.

“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators, as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus,” said Anderson. “This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”

“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.

Gayla Bell, a parent in the Eden Prairie School District presented research that the unhealthy curricula was on display and promoted at the Minnesota School Health Education Conference. “The graphic and unhealthy detail of these curricula is harmful to our children, said Bell. “Giving multiple sexual options to kids, including oral, anal sex and ‘rimming,’ will further spread disease amongst our youth. Condoms and dental dams do not make oral and anal sex healthy or safe,” she said.

Look who's saying we should teach the Bible in public schools!

By Tom Prichard

No it's not Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, though I don't think they'd object. No, it's Time magazine. In an interesting cover story
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1601845,00.html, Time supports teaching the bible in the Public schools.

What are some of the reasons supporting it's teaching in the classroom? For one, Time says the Bible is the bedrock of Western Culture.

• One can’t understand the origins of our culture, history, and institutions without understanding the Bible.
• Second, understanding the Bible is important for people, religious and nonreligious, to understand the many debates in our nation over evolution and creationism.
• Third, Time notes that the Bible is the most influential book ever written, all time best seller in history and the best seller every year. Maybe people should know something about it.
• Fourth, biblical themes and images permeate western and American culture and literature. From Shakespeare to Hemingway, from the Puritans and the Mayflower Compact to Abraham Lincoln's Inaugural Address and Martin Luther King's speeches, it’s important to understand the political ideas of our nation.

How can this be; wasn't the Bible tossed out of the public schools with the ban on school prayer and the posting of the Ten Commandments? While the United States Supreme Court banned school sponsored prayer and devotional reading, it didn't ban the reading and study of the Bible as literature.

It's refreshing to see common sense return to topics like studying the Bible in the public schools, especially by the more liberal Time magazine.

Related Article: Click Here to read "Allow schools to teach diversity of faiths" by Chuck Darrell

DFL Rep. Larry Hosch enables pot bill to pass committee

By Chuck Darrell

When it came time to be counted, Rep. Larry Hosch, DFL Dist 19A, passed, and enabled the smoked medical marijuana bill to clear the Health Care and Human Services Finance Committee this morning.

In a rare Saturday morning session the measure passed by a narrow 7-6 vote. Hoschs' vote would have killed the bill. Voting "yes" were DFL Representatives Cy Thao 65A, Thomas Huntley 7A, Paul Thiessen 63A, Erin Murphy 64A, Tina Liebling 30A, Diane Loefler 59A and Neva Walker 61B.

Opposition included DFL Rep. Julie Bunn 56A, who joined GOP Representatives Laura Brod 25A, Bruce Anderson 19A, Steve Gottwalt 15A, Sondra Erickson 16A, and Matt Dean 52A. Lead GOP Representative Jim Abeler and Joyce Peppin 32A were not present.

Hosch, who skipped the last hearing says he doesn't know where he stands on the bill. Minor amendments to the bill have caused him to reconsider his original opposition. However, no amount of tinkering will address the harm suffered by countless individuals - either directly or indirectly - due to pot.

Marijuana linked to murder in Chaska and Anoka

For example, in December, Chaska native, Grant Everson was convicted in the murder of his mother. According to the Star Tribune, "Grant Everson is convicted of plotting with his friend, Joel Beckrich, 21, to slit Tom and Nancy Everson's throats with box cutters as they slept and use the insurance payout to open a coffee chop and sell marijuana in Amsterdam, the Netherlands."

"The prosecution argued that Grant primarily wanted revenge on his parents for being too hard on him about work and school; he was earning a 0.0 grade-point average, and recently dropped out of technical school, wasn't working and spent a lot of time smoking marijuana and playing video games with friends, including Beckrich," the Star Tribune reported.

In Anoka County Jason Gonsioroski recently pleaded guilty to his daughter's death due to scalding, says the Pioneer Press. Gonsioroski portrayed himself as a "pot-smoking stay at home dad."

According to Lisa Sweetingham of Court TV, in California, In a fit of rage, 16 year old Scott Dyleski bludgeoned to death his 52 year old neighbor. Why? Because Dyleski and a friend had devised a plot to steal credit card numbers from his neighbor and buy marijuana-growing equipment online. The friend was to research the hydroponics equipment needed, while Dyleski would steal his neighbors credit information.

"During trial, prosecutor Hal Jewett theorized that Dyleski killed his neighbor in a case of rage and mistaken identity," says Sweetingham.

Clearly, bad public policy hurts women and children: a mother, daughter, and innocent neighbor all dead in pot related crimes.

Maybe it's time we demonstrated some compassion for these people as well.

Cannabis linked to lung cancer

From New Zealand Herald

"Cannabis smoking may cause 5 per cent of lung cancer cases in people up to middle age, according to a New Zealand study which challenges international thinking on the drug."

The smoking of marijuana for medical purposes is a dangerous way to administer THC.

Homosexual couple sues Rochester Athletic Club

Press Release

Homosexual couple sues Rochester Athletic Club over refusal to treat them like a married couple

Group links lawsuit with legislative efforts to create domestic status for homosexual couples as part of systematic effort to redefine marriage in Minnesota

MINNEAPOLIS – Tom Prichard, president of the Minnesota Family Council (MFC), said a lawsuit challenging the Rochester Athletic Club’s family membership policy which recognizes only married couples in their family membership is part of a systematic effort to redefine marriage in Minnesota.

“This lawsuit is another example of efforts by homosexual activists to redefine marriage. They’re using the legal system as well as the legislative process to achieve their goals,” said Prichard.

The Rochester Athletic Club is being sued by a lesbian couple who claim the Athletic Club’s family policy, which applies toward “legally married only” couples, is a violation of the state’s anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation.

“We’re seeing a systematic effort by homosexual activists at the legislature to lay the legal foundation for overturning Minnesota’s marriages. Now they’re attempting to force private organizations to treat homosexual couples on par with married couples. That certainly sounds like a push towards same sex marriage to me,” said Prichard.

“A vote in favor of domestic partner status for gay couples is a vote to legalize same-sex marriage,” said Chuck Darrell, MFC director of communications. “OutFront is sending a clear signal that they will never compromise until same-sex marriage is legalized. This is exactly why we need a marriage amendment,” he said.

In the state legislature, bills are moving forward which will provide marital benefits and marital type status for homosexual state employees (SF 1369/HF 1618) and local government employees (SF 960/HF 1097) through domestic partnerships. Domestic partner recognition is also being pushed for hospital visitation (SF 1398/HF 1589) and sick leave benefits (SF 1128/HF 219).

“The end game in all of this is a legal imposition of homosexual marriage upon the state of Minnesota. Domestic partner benefits and a legal attack on private businesses are merely part of their strategy,” concluded Prichard. “The result will be the further destabilization and redefinition of marriage. All of society suffers when marriage breaks down, particularly children who will be even more unlikely to be raised by a mother and a father.”

Coach Dungy Speaks Out in Support of Traditional Marriage

From Citizen Link

Last week, Super Bowl-winning Coach Tony Dungy spoke about his support for traditional marriage and efforts now underway to protect the institution from radical redefinition by Indiana judges. With those comments, he quickly became the target of pro-gay activists. (To view Dungy's comments, click here .)

While accepting an award from the Indiana Family Institute (IFI), a state-based family policy council proudly associated with Focus on the Family, the Indianapolis Colts Coach endorsed the Indiana Marriage Amendment. It would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman in the state constitution.

IFI is a key promoter of the Marriage Amendment, and Dungy said he "appreciate(s) the stance they're taking, and I embrace that stance."

"We're not anti-anything else," he said. "We're not trying to downgrade anyone else. But we're trying to promote the family – family values the Lord's way."

Dungy's mere presence at the IFI banquet generated outrage among the pro-gay community months ago, but his comments ensured their ire. Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson, Ph.D., praised Dungy for his principled stand in support of marriage as God ordained it.

"Tony Dungy has demonstrated he is not only a great coach, but a good and brave man," he said. "To defend God's truth so simply and strongly on what marriage ought to mean is to invite a blitz of hateful attacks from the homosexual activists and others on the left.

"Coach Dungy is no stranger to applause, of course. We applaud him today for his courage and his commitment to the Lord."

It's clear that those who disagree with Dungy would like nothing less than to strip him of his First Amendment right to free speech and to share his deeply held religious beliefs.

Gay-activist Web sites have launched a campaign aimed at forcing the Colts organization to censure their coach. In response to the criticism Dungy said, "They don't know me very well."

Pawlenty ready to veto finance bill containing discriminatory domestic partnership language

From Pat Condon, AP

"Pawlenty's spokesman, Brian McClung, said the governor has always made clear he is opposed to the state offering domestic partnership benefits. He said Pawlenty is willing to veto the entire state government finance bill - the vehicle for the benefits - over the issue. "

"One of the things that concerns us is that the governor has been willing to set aside controversial issues and focus on bread-and-butter items, and we see here that Senate Democrats are unwilling to do that in the spirit of cooperation," McClung said.

Domestic partner benefits for same-sex partners only.

By Chuck Darrell

The true nature of the discriminatory domestic partnership provision in the senate omnibus bill was revealed today by Sen. Sandy Pappas who admitted the intent of the "insurance" provision was to recognize committed relationships by people of the same sex.

Although the bill defines domestic partnership as person's of the same-sex only, Sen. Don Betzold was confused as to how anyone could "pretend" and "read stuff" into the wording.

Benefits were denied for two sisters or two brothers, a child and a dependent parent, a brother and a sister, two heterosexuals in a committed relationship, etc.

Honest common sense was provided by Sen. Tom Neuville, "I don't believe this is about insurance. I believe it is about laying a building block or corner stone for same-sex marriage."

I think Sen. Pappas would agree.

Sen. Dave Hann stated this is why we need an amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Education Minnesota cashing in their chips - and children suffer

By John Helmberger

MFC supports school choice as a key part of the solution to the problem off ailing public schools. Nobody cares more about the education of children than their parents do, and nobody is in a better position to determine what's best for their children's education than the parents are.

So we share the dismay of charter school supporters around the state at the Minnesota Senate proposal to limit school choice by capping the number of charter schools in the state at barely more than the current number (Pioneer Press, March 23rd).

Minnesota's experience with charter schools may not be problem-free, but there is no disputing the fact that they have given thousands of students, and their parents, a desperately needed alternative to public schools that were letting them down. Nick Coleman's ranting in the Strib not withstanding, the success of the charter school experiment makes the senate proposal to pull the plug on them that much more difficult to explain. Even House education advocate, Rep. Mindy Greiling (DFL-Roseville) - no moderate herself - described the proposal as "a pretty loopy idea that came out of left field," according to the Pioneer Press.

We think the Senate's "loopy" proposal reveals who's really in control overthere: Education Minnesota, the state's largest teachers' union, which played a major role in the DFL legislative gains last November, is calling in it's chips.

OutFront demands discriminatory, domestic partner status to allow two in an emergency room - everyone else can wait.

By Chuck Darrell

Like most hospitals in the metro area, MFC supports visitation privileges for homosexual couples. In fact, a brief survey of a half dozen metro area hospitals failed to discover a hospital that denied visitation to homosexual partners. One hospital rhetorically asked how they would know if a visitor was a brother, sister, or lover?

So, if gay partners can already visit one another in the hospital, then why does OutFront insist upon passing legislation (HF 1589, SF 1398) creating special "domestic partner" status for homosexual visitation purposes?

Apparently because they want special emergency room privledges.

A recent OutFront press release shed light on "Compelling" senate testimony by J. Lindsay Flint, "whose partner was denied access to the emergency room where Lindsay was with their two-year-old son as he was suffering from pneumonia. 'I am scared because I know my son is very ill and not able to breathe. The last thing I want to be doing is justifying why we both had the right to be in this room.'"

Lindsay's partner was wasting her time if she was using her sexual orientation to justify her right to be in the emergency room. The same survey discovered that hospitals have a general policy of allowing only one person in an emergency room with a patient at a time. Since Lindsay was already in the emergency room, her partner simply had to wait her turn - like everyone else.

Do homosexuals really need special "domestic partner" status to allow two in an emergency room? Are their needs any different than other emergency room patients?

Clearly, OutFront is trying to create a special, discriminatory status where none is needed.

By Tom Prichard

Normally, you would think society would discourage people from engaging in destructive behavior. Take alcoholism for example. Although influenced by genetics, it’s fundamentally a behavior. Alcoholism is associated with a reduced life expectancy of 5 to 10 years, chronic and sometimes fatal liver cancer, pneumonia, higher rates of suicide, and mental disabilities. Costly treatment usually helps only 30% of those seeking it. Naturally, society does whatever it can to discourage people from abusing alcohol and falling into alcoholism.

There’s another behavioral condition that reduces one’s life expectancy by up to 25 years, is associated with chronic and sometimes fatal liver cancer, fatal immune system disease, fatal rectal cancer and higher rates of suicide. Yet treatment usually results in a 50% success rate. The difference is that society often applauds and encourages this behavior. What am I talking about? It’s called homosexuality.

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover wrote this striking comparison of alcoholism and homosexuality in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. The comparison shows that homosexual behavior is more dangerous than alcoholism. What’s so sad is that alcoholism is discouraged and frowned upon while homosexuality is applauded and even celebrated by many in society.

True concern for homosexuals involves confronting - not endorsing homosexual behavior. While this might not be popular, it’s the right and loving thing to do.

Sex ed teaching 8,000 metro students "there is no right or wrong, and no good or bad choices"

By Barb Anderson

Once again the Minnesota School Health Education Conference rates an "F" in its advice to teens about sex education.

The Birds & Bees Project presenter, Amanda Danzeisen, led the session entitled "Teaching Teens about Pregnancy Options." Danzeisen stated that when speaking to teens you must tell them, "there is no right or wrong, and no good or bad choices." Students must make "the decision that is best for them."

The 187-page "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health" was available to educators. This educator;'s guide is nothing more than a how-to manual for teaching homosexual sex and a range of sexual options to teens.

The "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health" emphasizes the importance of using "inclusive language when discussing abstinence," and says to define sex as "oral, anal, and vaginal rather that just vaginal." This "...Will help to create a respectful and inclusive classroom environment." According to the educator's guide, defining sex only as "penile-vaginal" excludes gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (GLBTQ) youth and will "reinforce stereotypes about gender and sexual orientation."

Moral relativism is paramount in this guidebook as all decisions for teens are to be respected about whether "to be, or not to be, sexually active." Students must figure it out on their own as they learn to "develop their own values" apart from their parents.

Lesson one instructs students to discuss what they feel is OK for them to do as they learn the importance of "defining 'abstinence' for themselves." The behaviors that are listed include: cuddling without clothes on, giving oral sex, having anal intercourse, having vaginal intercourse, rubbing bodies together with clothes on, masturbating with a partner, touching a partner's genitals etc.

Lesson plans for this same age group include how to make a dental dam in case your child should choose to participate in "cunnilingus, analingus or rimming."

After all, the guide states, "People who are questioning their sexual orientation many experiment in an effort to determine their sexual identity."

Amanda assured attendees that all of their information is presented in a "non-biased format." When questioned from the audience as to why one classroom scenario refers to pregnant Kendra as pro-choice, but does not describe her boyfriend (who does not want her to have an abortion) as pro-life, Ms. Danzeisen replied, "The Birds & Bees Project uses the term anti-choice - not pro-life." So much for being non-biased!

Amanda also claimed that The Birds & Bees Project was not political. Students, however, are asked to discuss the following:"Why do you think people protest outside of abortion clinics? Do people protest other surgical procedures that are legal? Do you think it should be legal to protest outside of abortion clinics or do you think this is a form of harassment?"

Students are also told "There is no scientific evidence for the so-called "post-abortion trauma syndrome," and "The most common feelings women report after having an abortion are relief and happiness."

Youth ages 12 and up are taught the ABC plan for sex education. "A" stands for abstinence. Teachers, however, are instructed, "Tell your students that 99.9% of the population will stop practicing abstinence at some point in their lives." A sexual health back-up plan is the next step for students. The letter "B" stands for birth control and also Plan B - the brand mane for emergency contraception. The letter "C" stands for choice.

The Birds & Bees Project claims to "educate more than 8,000 young people in the Twin Cities metro area each year." After reviewing the guide, I believe the best choice parents can make is to pull their kids out of these classes! Find out what your child is learning in sex education this year. Ask your school district to reject The Birds & Bees Project and the "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health."

Reporters guilty of incremental reporting

By Chuck Darrell

So far the local press has covered only half of OutFront's campaign for same-sex marriage via incremental, legislative steps. In today's Pioneer Press, Jason Hoppin focused on one bill - allowing local municipalities the option to offer benefits - while ignoring the second, which mandates that the state redefine marriage (domestic partnership) and allow benefits to those persons. How can the reader discern the overall plan when they only get half the story?

T. Budig, EMC capitol reporter repeats OutFront's talking point - "local control" - yet ignores the second bills state-wide mandate.

To his credit, Budig reports that Ann DeGroot, president of OutFront, admits there is no secret that the legislation is part on an attempt to achieve equal (same-sex marriage) rights for gays. But he fails to discuss OutFront's Summary of Legislative Proposals that lists nine objectives for the 2007 session.

I encourage Hoppin and Budig to report the whole story, not just selected increments.

"Fair minded common sense" understands OutFront will never compromise

By Chuck Darrell

OutFront begs the question whether it's the "Minnesota way" to draw attention to their Summary of Legislative Proposals. Apparently, "fair minded common sense" is keeping the voter clueless while legislators mandate state government to redefine marriage (domestic partnership) as two persons of the same-sex.

Would it be "fair minded" to question if their proposals pass, will OutFront demand more?

After the "no compromise" strategies in CT, VT and New Jersey, "common sense" says, no.