Gay Blogger (Unawares) Reveals Source of Same-Sex Attraction: Child Abuse

It's time to declare a harsh truth on the matter of homosexuality and transgenderism. The destructive behaviors, the false identities are the result of neglect, trauma, confusion, and molestation.

People who engage in these behaviors are victims themselves, so it's understandable that people are initially reticent to criticize the behaviors and condemn the agenda. No one wants to be labeled "anti-gay" or "anti-trans."

However, the origins of these harmful behaviors and pernicious lies are neither gay nor transitory. They create a lifetime of harm, and they are based on hurt at the outset.

We need to stand for truth so that we can set people free and help them (and others) stand up to abuse, hate, and lies.

In Singapore, homosexual activist Sean Foo shared his story:

Sean Foo as a child

              

Growing up, I struggled a lot with my masculinity.

Why would a child struggle with being a boy or a girl? These are not innate problems or issues. You are born male or female. There is nothing inherently wrong with a person just on account of this fact. If someone struggles with this identity, or if they feel unsure about their identity, that problem is the result of an environmental issue, pressure or shame from the outside of the person.

So, where did this source of confusion come from for Little Sean?

At home, I was always getting scolded for not being manly enough. In school, my effeminate nature made me an easy target. I lost count of the number of times someone called me a ‘sissy’. I grew to really hate that word.

Here, we have a boy who was shamed by his family, and he was rejected by his peers. This is a perfect storm for fomenting same-sex attraction, same-sex attraction. I can't imagine the sense of hurt, the sense of rejection that he endured because his parents, presumably his father, told him that he was not really a man, that he was not acting the way that a man should. That kind of shame takes its toll on a person.

And that is precisely what happened:

So I tried very hard to adopt conventionally masculine mannerisms. Not doing so had consequences. I learnt to sit the ‘right’ way. Walk the ‘right’ way. Hold my wrists the ‘right’ way.  And over time, I succeeded. I moulded myself into someone most would consider ‘straight-acting’. So, the bullying stopped. And for a while, all was well.

When someone has to "try" to be something that they already are, there you have the basis for a emotional disorder, a mental challenge. To shame a child for not measuring up to a strange, if not unattainable standard, is child abuse. Kids need to be nurtured, strengthened, supported. They need to know that they are loved and accepted, even when they fail. That is how children grow strong, how they settle into their identity as men or as women.

I must repeat, based on the emotional harm that he endured as a kid, it's clear that Sean was abused as a kid, it's just that simple. He was not "born in the wrong body," nor was he gay at the outset. Just because boys have slightly different mannerisms does not make them any less of a boy. And the same holds true for girls.

But then… puberty struck.

Sean Foo as an adult

                             

I was 13 when it happened. A handsome senior in school caught my eye. And for the first time in my life, I experienced same-sex attraction. I panicked. So I rushed home to conduct some research to seek an explanation for what I was feeling.

Why did Sean experience this attraction? For years prior, he had been told, and thus he did not feel that he was a proper male. The lack of affirmation creates an emotional void, a dire need within a person. As a result, he was drawn to fit in with other males and try to fit into their mold. A number of reparative therapists talk about this issue at great length, that males will have emotional attachments to other males if they do not get the confirmation they need as children. That need, if left unresolved, turns into a sexual desire. For so long, Sean had felt that there was something wrong with him--because so many people in his own household told him that he was not male enough. What a shame. It's such a shame that he was treated so poorly by his family.

I do not want Sean to think that his family is essentially wicked. Whatever happened to his parents, whatever wrong believing they harbored, whether it was his father or whoever else, they projected this lie onto their son. Sadly, Sean has suffered under this lie, and that is wrong. Someone should have affirmed him as a boy when he was a boy.

I remember vividly the wave of relief that swept over me when I read that same-sex attraction was a normal phase during puberty. That made sense to me. After all, I was in an all-boys school. I was convinced that once I graduate, I would grow out of all this confusion.

Sean himself recognized the confusion in his life. He was confused early on because he was told that he was not really "boyish" or manly enough, when the truth is that he was already a male, and that there was no need for him to try to be "more manly."

In my case however, it was never a phase. My homosexual tendencies followed me as I proceeded on to junior college. It didn’t matter that my junior college had an abundance of girls. My heart only saw men.

These identity issues will linger with people if they do not hear the truth and get the proper care and attention that they need. It's no surprise that these issues did not abate for him, because at the outset his own family dishonored him unfairly.

I was so deep in denial that I somehow managed to convince myself that I was straight despite the fact that I was crushing on guys around me all the time.

The only denial that Sean has been struggling with is the lie that he is not really a man, when true to form he was born a male, and he has nothing to be ashamed of. The shame and misunderstandings from his childhood were wrong, and they imposed on him a false impression. Notice the pain and confusion that he went through? I cannot stress enough how abusive it is for parents to shame their children, to damage them emotionally by denying and denigrating their true basic identity.

In my desperate bid to conform, I tried very hard to develop feelings for the opposite sex. I dated a couple of girls over the years. But for obvious reasons, none of them worked out. But I never gave up. Convinced that it was just a matter of meeting the right girl. Being gay was simply not an option for me.

Notice throughout his testimony this theme of "I tried very hard." This constant effort to try to be something that he already is will create so many problems. There is something about human nature, that the more one tries t be something that seems unattainable, the worse the problem becomes.

In fact, Paul the Apostle writes extensively about this struggle in Romans 7:

"19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

"20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

"21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me." (Romans 7:19-21)

It took me some time. 10 years to be exact. But I finally had that long belated epiphany at the age of 23. There was no life changing incident that triggered it. I just woke up one day and acknowledged to myself that I was gay. And with that simple revelation, the inner turmoil that plagued my life for a decade dissipated.

Here, Sean just gives into the lie, because he cannot understand why he continued to have that struggle. The fact is that he has operated under a larget yet more subtle lie, one which was imposed at him at too young an age: that he was not "manly" enough.

I can only hope that someone someday will inform him that there was nothing wrong with him as a boy, and that he needs the affirmation in the truth of who he is, nothing more:

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)

It's time for us to intervene against these lies and stand for truth. It's time for us to tell people who struggle with LGBT issues that they are not defined by their feelings, nor should they limit themselves to what people said about them when they were younger. They need to embrace the radical and releasing truth that they were not born "gay," and that they do not have to give into feelings that will lea them to more harm, pain, and loss.

Letters to the Editor for "Tear Down This Icon"

Two weeks ago, I wrote the first article in over a year for Townhall.com.

Tear Down This Icon: Replace Reagan with Trump

Here are two letters I received in response:

Whew! This is silly in the extreme. Trump was a fine president but he did not defeat Russia , crush the Dems, popularize Republicans or stay in office for 12 years (Bush was gifted the White House then blew it). The 12 years was a vital. The Donald did not give that to us. Not necessarily his fault but facts are facts. This effort by you is a monumental waste of time and print. We need Republican icons ,not fewer. Reagan as icon does nothing to detract from Trump so stop setting up a battle that only Dems will enjoy.

Russell Falconer

And here's another letter I received today!

Dear Mr. Schaper,

I recently read your article titled “Tear down this icon and replace with Trump…” and I felt it absolutely necessary to write and personally thank you for taking the time to write and publish this article of factual information.  I’m a writer and in all honestly it was a pleasure to read something about President Trump  that was positive and filled with facts and compliments, not facetious, insulting, & malicious, minutia.  I get most of my news from NewsMax TV.  However, I also read a lot of articles that show up in my inbox and for the most part, they are filled with lies and ambiguous opinions that are all spewed from the mouths of idiots who know absolutely nothing about anything!  

President Trump has done more for this country than any other President and it’s about damn time all of the Republicans get in sync with one another, throw away their stupid egos, and stand united as ONE PARTY, with President Trump as our #1 Leader!  I am fed up with the LEFTISTS and THE DEMOCRATS getting away with all sorts of criminal acts while the Republicans sit around and spend too much time on issues that are the least of our problems.  While most Republicans feel that the “abortion” issue was a win -win and a victory, they spent too much time discussing it when it’s an issue I personally  feel should not be part of a political stance.  This was just one example.  

There’s much more I can write  about when it comes to President Trump.  And  while I did my part both in 2016 and the 2020 elections by working as a digital activist for the Trump Campaign, now more than ever, I want to fight with ALL of my being to help President Trump (more-so) and the Republican party; provided that there are no more Republicans who turn their back on President Trump.  Otherwise, I can no longer support the GOP.  

Sincerely,

Madonna Gallis

The Gay Agenda is Dead and Gone

Dear LGBT Activists,

We know that you have been bullying everyone for LGBT supremacy for the last twenty years.

And We the People have had enough.

So, for people like you, we have a song to share.

[Sung to the tune of "We're Coming for Your Children," by the creepy predator Gay Men's Chorus of San Francisco]

---------------------------------------

You think we're bigots. You think you have a right to flaunt your hate.

For thirty years, you've lied to our faces that you were "Born that way."

From the start, you're INCORRECT!

We’ll restore the family, happens bit by bit,

Loudly and proudly, and you'll just have to deal with it.

We will end all the drag shows, abandon San Francisco,

Make men stop wearing dresses, so there!

We’ll restore the truth … and make you tolerant and fair.

You should be worried: We'll convert your friends.

You won’t approve that everyone has turned Right.

And you’ll be disgusted when we all start learning things online

That you kept far from our sight. [Like "Not born that way."]

We’ll convert the public – Yes we will!

Reaching one and all,

There’s really no escaping it, because everyone actually hates RuPaul.

The world’s getting brighter, Gen Z’s MAGA -- and fighters!

We’re calling you out. We’re protecting all the children.

The gay agenda is going down.

The gay agenda is dead and gone.” 

Tear Down This Icon: Replace Reagan with Trump

In 2013, after Republicans lost their winnable race against Barack Obama to deny him a second term, Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin sounded off with a daring opinion piece:

Tear Down This Icon

Normally, I would not give a fake conservative, closet NeverTrump liberal the time of day. But her article arguing for removing Ronald Reagan as a rallying point for the Republican Party resonated with me in the past.

Reagan was a big spender, even in Washington. He had liberal positions during his governorship. He supported amnesty for illegal aliens, and he even pressed for an open border of commerce, trade, etc. with Mexico. Many national-populist types are turning on Reagan for precisely these issues, and even his major columnist supporter George Will would denounce the clash between Reagan's rhetoric and the reality of his administration nearly thirty years after he was elected.

Now, let's take a closer look at Rubin's ruminations:

The unfailing reverence on the American right for Ronald Reagan is understandable. He was the only exemplar of modern conservatism to win the White House, and unlike liberal icons such as Roosevelt or Johnson or Obama, he presided over an economic boom and became beloved by voters not normally drawn to his party. No wonder that Reagan, long before his death in 2004, attained mythical status in the conservative movement and the Republican Party.

Nearly ten years after this statement, this mystical hold of Reaganism still grips the Republican Party, especially the National Federation of Republican Assemblies.

We should give some credit where it is due, anyway. Reagan presided over eight years of unprecedented economic growth. His foreign policy hearkened back to a more isolationist approach, in which he spoke softly but carried a big stick. His aggressive efforts to sanction and stop communism, especially the Soviet Union, are admirable. The USSR collapsed in large part because of Reagan's indefatigable commitment to consign communism to the ashheap of history.

Rubin continues:

But that myth has become a burden for the modern GOP. It has bound Reagan’s followers on the right to policies and positions that were time-specific. The old guard has become convinced that Reagan’s solutions to the problems of his time were the essence of conservatism — not simply conservative ideas appropriate for that era.

This is an accurate and effective criticism. The issues which Reagan faced in 1980 and 1984--inflation, recession, communism around the globe--were not the major issues of Election 2012. In fact, they are not the main issues today. As I mentioned above, Reagan's policies counter the goals and interests of conservatives today!

We want to secure the border, limit immigration (not just stop illegal immigration.) We want to expand gun ownership and assure gun rights, not deprive them. Also, China is a looming global (and globalist) threat which cannot be tamed with free trade.

Reagan's solutions and successes will not help the GOP today.

And with that, Rubin gave a stern warning to the Twenty-first Century GOP:

The Republican Party can remain a Ronald Reagan historical society, or it can try to endure as a force in national politics. But it can’t do both. The choice matters greatly, for there is no guarantee that the GOP will retain its ability to win national elections or that conservatism has a future as a national governing philosophy.

I could not agree more with this sentiment. It seems to me that Republicans want to live in the past. They do not want to move with the times, i.e. get fighting new fights. There is this hope that they can coast on prior victories.

However, I do not agree with Rubin that the party needs to move left on key cultural or economic issues. The last thing that the United States, or any country for that matter, needs is two liberal, progressive, leftist, communist parties, etc.

In her article tearing down Icon Reagan, she does not despise traditional values. She does make a great deal of noise about outreach to other demographics in the country, and even the RNC Chairman at the time, Reince Priebus, acknowledged that 

The Family Research Council rejects Rubin's suggestion, but focused on his campaign process to win as many states as possible throughout the country:

In a play on one of the Gipper’s greatest lines, the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin urges us to “Tear Down this Icon.” The highly touted “From the Right” columnist urges conservatives and Republicans to get over the Reagan legacy.

By the recent showings of the party’s presidential nominees, one would think the GOP has certainly gotten over Ronald Reagan. When was the last time the Beltway campaign consultants, those high-priced hirelings, even attempted to win the whole country? Besotted by Red State/Blue State calculations, and armed with their white boards, the big domes never have come close to Reagan’s generous inclusiveness. Reagan thought of all the states as Red, White & Blue. He wanted to win them all, and twice nearly did.

Family Research Council writers are correct, in that the Republican Party has eschewed fighting for the entire country, and instead got comfortable with barely getting by. That never works in politics for the long term. California Republicans have followed that model since 2002, and now California is a deep-blue whole of progressive despair. Controlled opposition does not win the fight.

Rubin's point still deserves attention, i.e. the Republican Party needs to get beyond celebrating Reagan's old victories. There are new culture war issues that need to be fought, and just basking in the shadows of Reagan's past is not going to help the party--or the country--today.

So, I do agree with the general sentiment: time to move on from Reagan. I have written about this issue a number of times.

I submit that it's time to recognize President Trump as the new standard-bearer for the Republican Party. He accomplished a number of domestic policy goals which matter today. He fought to build the wall along our Southern border, not just talk about it. He focused on illegal immigration and mass immigration, which was decimating border communities and harming working people.

He is the most pro-life President we have ever had in the White House. He was the first President to address the March for Life in Washington DC. He repeatedly took efforts to cut funding to Planned Parenthood and other abortuary hate groups and institutions. 

He focused on protecting and enhancing religious liberty in a nation where respect for the divine has been unduly tarnished and neglected. 

He kept the United States out of war for four years. 

He fought against the encroachment of domestic communism, including Critical Racist Theorty and Woke ideologies. Reagan fought international communism, and that deserves merit and support. But we need to fight this corrupt, corrosive, evil ideology at home now, and we need a real culture war commitment to fighting and winning this fight.

Republicans have wanted to bask in the glowing of Reagan's old victories. President Trump's victories then and now deserve our new--and renewed--focus.

Most importantly, though, Trump should be the new standard-bearer because He Fights. He was a relentless pugilist in the fight to put America and Americans First. That spirit of trudging through tough times, of putting up one's dukes to fight and win, we need that kind of animus in conservative politics. We don't need controlled opposition, we don't need politicians who play by Queensbury Rules, while the Left routinely breaks the law and does whatever they want.

Reagan had his place, but it's time to move on. We need a new standard, a new pattern, a new example of conservatism that fights to win, that struggles to shape the culture, that moves forward to ensure and foster a movement.

It's time to tear down Reagan and replace him with Trump.

LA County Board of Dictators: Stop Attempted Coup Against Sheriff

I received this call to action from a health freedom activist earlier today.

We need to help Sheriff Villaneuva fight the abuse of power from the LA County Board of Supervisors!

Friends,

We URGENTLY need your help!!! The Board of Supervisors now are planning on a motion to grant themselves impeachment powers over the Sheriff, and the power to appoint a new Sheriff. https://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/bos/supdocs/170713.pdf

THIS IS A VERY CONCERNING CONSOLIDATION OF THEIR POLITICAL POWER!! PLEASE do not let them take away your right to vote. Article II of the California Constitution allows the people to recall and remove elected officials. KEEP THIS POWER WITH THE PEOPLE. The Board should NOT supercede our vote. WE NEED YOUR VOICES!! Please call and email Janice Hahn & Holly Mitchell BY Friday. Her staff will answer the phone and relay your sentiments to Hahn. Barger is against this already. We need Hahn to be on the same page!! Holly Mitchell. 310 680 8601 , 213 974 2222 Janice Hahn: (213)974-4444. Email: FourthDistrict@bos.lacounty.gov (template below) It doesn't matter which district you live in, PLEASE CALL HAHN AND LET HER KNOW YOU ARE ADAMANTLY AGAINST THIS!!! Thank you, Friends of Sheriff Villanueva Sample Email: Dear Supervisor Hahn: I am writing to you in adamant and resolute opposition to the motion by Supervisor Mitchell and Supervisor Solis, "Promoting Accountability and Community Safety through checks and balances of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department." With this attempt to consolidate power, more checks and balances seem to be needed to govern the Board of Supervisors, not the Sheriff. This motion is maddening, usurping my voting rights, and discrediting the people's choice. Checks and balances are already afforded to the people through Article II of the California Constitution, to recall and remove an elected official. And this process does work, hence the successful submission of 717,000 in the process to recall George Gascon. As your constituent, I implore you to vote "NO" on this horrific motion. Sincerely, YOUR NAME

Torrance City Council Elections 2022: The Lies of Dishonest Jean Adelsman

Here is one more post that I wanted to share. Many people in the city pressed me to show proof that Jean Adelsman, Councilman Aurelio Mattucci's opponent, had lied about him and his term in office.

Well, here you go:

                     

Here's the deal:

Aurelio took donations from a number of business owners and other economic interests in the city.

Why?

Because Aurelio is a fiscal conservative who opposes excessive spending and tax hikes. Every business wants that.

And then there's this post:

                

No, Aurelio did not vote to defund the police. He did not vote to cut funding from the police department. In fact, he followed the recommendations from the chief of police not to fill a select number of positions in order to save the city money and get the general funds back to a healthy reserve again.

So, those are two clear examples of Dishonest Jean's last-minute attacks to take down Councilman Mattucci, and they both failed.

Effective Activism: A Reflection

 I have been reflecting on what constitutes effective activism for the last few months. 

The world has gotten darker and crazier, but that is not an invitation for all of us to just sit back and do nothing.

Since 2014, I have been heavily involved in local, state, and even national activism.

I worked with pro-American groups like We The People Rising to stop illegal immigration and mass immigration, both of which were pushing away the needs of Americans and undermining the healthy sovereignty of America.

I also focused a great deal on ending the abuses of union power in local and state governments. Right-to-work laws need to be enacted as quickly as possible throughout the country.

Last of all, and most importantly, I have been working heavily on the fight against the normalization and proliferation of homosexuality and transgenderism. These are perverse behaviors propping up destructive, harmful ideologies, and they need to be stopped. Now we witness hardened LGBT activists forcing these perverse lies on children in the public schools, and they are bullying adults in the public square. All of this must be stopped.

At any rate, I have engaged in activism of all kinds, and I have organized people to fight different issues. The more work that I have done, the more I have learned to discern which actions work, and which do not. I also noticed how elected officials seemed to react different ways depending on which types of activism people were involved in. 

Which efforts actually yield results? Is it really worth our time to set up flags and signs on a street corner, when politicians will just continue to engage in the terrible policies we want them to stop?

In February 2019, I attended a Remembrance of Life for Deanne D'Lean, a very creative activist and poster-maker who attended many pro-America rallies, fought hard against illegal immigration, and worked her best to stop the lawlessness that had become all too pervasive in the state of California. We all reminisced on what a great fighter she was, and we hoped to carry on her spirit and her legacy in the fight to stop open borders and reckless disregard for the rule of law.

I then spoke up, and I made a pointed criticism: are we really making a difference? Our numbers are not growing, either. What do we do about this?

Some of the members of the team were a little defensive about these points. Others agreed that we needed to be more focused to be effective. What are we trying to fight? What are our goals, and how are we trying to move the needle for more victories in the future?

In short, are we really making a difference?

I had to submit to the team, that We the People Rising was not making a difference. Showing up to rallies and holding signs, yelling at bad politicians and embarrassing crazed leftists on one's smartphone are not really effective means for change. The bad politicians continue doing bad things, and all we got was frustration in return.

Unlike the other members of the team, I was busy signing people up, taking steps to start building numbers, contacts, future activists. This approach was more effective, I felt, in getting people involved, to do more than just show up at city council meetings and yell at bad politicians.

During the heydays of fighting the California Sanctuary State Law SB 54, I called city councils and county boards throughout the state to go on record opposing SB 54, and furthermore to make it clear to the state leadership that those jurisdictions would not comply with the lawless outlaw policy of shielding illegal aliens within the state. I wanted to do more than just send a message of opposition. I liked what Los Alamitos was pledging to do, i.e. refuse to comply with the law and instead continue their ongoing relationship with federal law enforcement agencies.

In short, I wanted to see movement, momentum to stop these bad laws and get good laws, policies, or at the very least non-compliance in place.

So, you can see that activism for me is about results, not just actions. It's about real outcomes, not just rhetoric. What's the point of protesting if you cannot stop the bad policies? We want to make a change, get better people elected, make a real difference, not just make some real noise.

So, with this analysis in place, I wanted to discuss this deeper in a balance of contrasts.

Congressman Paul Gosar v. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene

Paul Gosar is outspoken. He is not afraid to give out really strong America First rhetoric. He speaks to key conferences, he reaches out to young voters, he wants to get the next generation fully engaged to take on the corporatist, globalist cabal which has become all too pervasive in Washington DC.

And yet, I don't see him really doing much to stop the flow of madness pushed by the current Democratic majority. Yes, he puts out some mean memes, and he says some tough stuff, but what else is he doing?

In contrast, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has been using every parliamentary tactic at her disposal to slow down business in the House of Representatives. She has repeatedly protests the COVID-19 restrictions, and she has worked with her colleagues to defy those ridiculous rules in turn. She has gone to great lengths with the media to expose the plights of the January 6 prisoners, the vast majority of whom should be released immediately.

She is also networking with potential candidates across the country, hoping to get more elected MAGA candidates to the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. She doesn't just introduce legislation, but uses every resource she has to push for commonsense reforms that are good for the people, which put America first.

I see her doing stuff. I see her trying to accomplish key goals. I see her fighting with the regressive left every way she can, and I also see her taking on and trying to take down RINOs in her own caucus. She is planning ahead, wanting to advance a larger agenda.

Every Congressman should be doing what she is doing. It's not enough to tweet the right things and speak at the right conferences. We need Congressmen who want to stop the bad stuff and pass the good stuff.

Alex Stein

Alex Stein Taking on Ted Cruz and Dan Crenshaw

Alex Stein is a fiery YouTube/Social Media personality. He is not afraid to get in politicians' faces and confront them on bad votes.

But one has to wonder: how effective is it to get politicians a little flustered, when nothing changes in their voting patterns?

Alex Stein confronted US Senator Ted Cruz and Congressman Dan Crenshaw at the Texas GOP Convention earlier this year. Yes, he made loud protests at their tables, denouncing them for voting to send more money to Ukraine, while doing very little for American citizens.

However, his blustery approach with Ted Cruz backfired. Cruz sat calmly, then parried him with some quiet words, then said "God Bless You." That exchange made Cruz look good, and it made Stein look bad. 

And I have to ask: did that little tantrum in front of the US Senator stop any bad votes in the United States Senate? Did it change any policies?

I ask the same questions regarding his interactions with Dan Crenshaw. Indeed, Eye-Patch McCain is an embarrassment to the state of Texas and to the United States. He is a frequent face at the World Economic Forum, and he is pushing a globalist agenda, undercutting the rights of American citizens all while flashing his veteran status, as if that makes him immune to criticism.

But one question I have for Alex Stein: did you support Crenshaw's primary challenger this year? Did you attend his town halls and find out how to get other voters to mobilize against this fool and get him out of office?

If there are no moves to threaten politicians' actual power, it's very easy for them to pat these social media influencers on the head, or curse them under their breath, but ultimately to ignore them, to ignore us. Politicians will not take us seriously if they feel that their power is not being threatened. If they are not losing money, votes, or reputation in the eyes of their voters, they really don't care about us.

And that leads me to the next comparison ...

We the People Rising v. Kevin De Leon and Antonio Villaraigosa

We the People Rising and other LA County MAGA activists crashed the Santa Monica Democratic club meeting in the city's library in May 2018. Two major candidates spoke at the event: US Senate candidate Kevin De Leon, the State Senate president pro tem at the time; and Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles.

Both of them were running as outsider candidates against the established incumbent (Dianne Feinstein) and heir apparent (Gavin Newsom).

De Leon and Villaraigosa were not really phased by our presence in the audience, and at one point De Leon even mocked us as his "groupies." This was really frustrating.

By and large, the answered all the questions in the usual left-wing manner. They wanted to open up the borders, decriminalize "homelessness," and they wanted to raise taxes and push for a greater government presence in our healthcare system.

By and large, they did not care about our outrage against illegal immigration and open borders. Such issues are a mainstay for the California Democratic Party at this point. It's really disturbing stuff. 

But ...

I was the first one to ask a question that Kevin De Leon by surprise. At the time, he was still roommates with State Senator Tony Mendoza, a relentless womanizer who got caught up in the #MeToo scandals that had been rocking the halls of Sacramento. I confronted him about not doing anything to help the women who have been harmed and abused by staffers and legislators in Sacramento.

That issue really bothered De Leon, and he began sputtering and struggling to defend himself, and he went to every length he could to show that he had distanced himself from Mendoza and that he was also committed to doing everything possible to protect women in the state legislature. For the first time in memory, De Leon was afraid of what the conservative activists had to say.

Then another one of the MAGA activists confronted Villaraigosa about the needs of California's veterans. The former mayor did everything he could to prove that he wanted to do what was best for the men and women who had fought for this country. He lingered over that question and made sure that he could answer it every way that he could to assure the audience.

Why was it that on those two questions, the two candidates got worried and all bent out of shape? For once, they actually cared to make sure that We the People were satisfied with their answers. Why did they care? Because those issues, women's rights and the care for veterans, were key issues that differentiated them from their establishment challengers, and those were issues that the Democratic regulars were also focusing on.

In other words, they feared the potential votes/money they would lose if they did not handle those issues properly. Activists need to change strategies to force bad politicians to do good things in the future based on issues that immediately touch on their distinct voter base. They don't care about illegal immigration, but they do not want to be viewed as too soft on women's issues, on fighting sexual harassment. Conservatives may have to hone their attack on those kinds of issues, even if they are not the most pertinent to our specific cause.

The Blueprint: How Liberals Campaign v. How Conservatives Campaign

The final thoughts that I want to share come from my reflections on the book The Blueprint.

This fascinating read details how four left-wing billionaires collaborated effectively with liberal activists in the state of Colorado and flipped the state legislature and then the US Senate, House seats, and Governor's races to the Democrats.

Colorado had been a reliably red state for decades. Then all of that changed in 2004, when George W. Bush successful captured the state one last time for the GOP (until 2022), but down-ballot Democrats decimated Republicans in the state legislature, flipping the two chambers to Democratic control for the first time in decades.

It was a political earthquake which a lot of people did not see coming. How did the liberals do it?

They set up massive political, cultural, and media organs to push their agenda. They targeted key seats that were on the margin, which could have been flipped with a 1-3% higher turnout. They didn't get caught up in trying to flip statewide offices until later election cycles.

They approached the campaign and election process like a business. They assessed where would be the best places to invest money, which candidates to support, where could they target voters to ensure just enough of a turnout to flip a seat, and which seats to flip in order to get a governing majority.

They approached campaigning like a business.

In contrast, conservatives tend to campaign and donate like ... liberals! They focus on what makes them feel good, what will get the best headline, or what will ingratiate them to future prospective business interests. They don't campaign and invest like activists, but rather they treat politics as an entertaining hobby. That kind of politicking simply does not work.

Activism, elctioneering, winning the vote and the fight, all of this requires real strategy, a focus on what will help our side gain the most power to make the most gains and do the most good. This kind of thinking needs to guide conservatives and their strategic efforts going forward. This is the kind of activism that needs conservative grassroots need to invest in.

Campaign Life Coalition: Vote Leslyn Lewis for Canada's Conservative Party Leader

 

Dear Arthur, It’s time to elect a pro-life Conservative Leader and future Prime Minister! We were surprised to learn today that the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) began mailing out ballots three weeks earlier than previously indicated. Some pro-life CLC supporters already received it this morning, July 7th! If you’re an eligible CPC voting member, meaning you joined or renewed your party membership no later than June 3, 2022, please follow the recommendation in our Voter’s Guide to rank Leslyn Lewis as the #1 and only choice on your ballot. See sample ballot below. NOTE: A ballot is valid if at least one candidate is selected. Out of the six candidates on the ballot, only Leslyn Lewis is pro-life. All the other candidates have publicly expressed support for killing children in the womb. So we must send a message of disapproval for that untenable, anti-human rights position, by not ranking them down-ballot. Pro-lifers should never vote for a pro-abortion candidate. It’s that simple. Lewis is the only one who deserves the support of socially conservative voters who believe in the inalienable value and dignity of every human life. Having won the popular vote during the 2020 CPC Leadership race, it is very possible that she could come out on top this time around. We know she will be a popular choice for all CPC members, so don’t believe the hype that Poilievre has this in the bag. Leslyn has a very real path to victory. You can view the main rating page on our Voter’s Guide by clicking here. The detailed rating page for each candidate can be viewed by clicking on their respective links below: • LESLYN LEWIS • ROMAN BABER • PIERRE POILIEVRE • SCOTT AITCHISON • JEAN CHAREST • PATRICK BROWN Note: Brown was disqualified from the contest on July 5th because of allegations of fraudulent and illegal behaviour by his campaign, including allegations that his campaign paid the fee for memberships. His name will still appear on the ballot however, because the ballots had already been printed. Completed ballots must be returned to the party's agent, Deloitte Canada, using the postage-paid business rely envelope, before September 10th. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at clc@clife.ca. For life, family, faith & freedom, Jack Fonseca Director of Political Operations Campaign Life Coalition P.S. For a web version of this

MassResistance Parent Exposes LGBT Grooming in Seattle Public Schools

 

MassResistance parent infiltrates “transgender” training session for elementary school teachers – asks presenters hard questions.

Instruction on pushing “gender” ideology on children: Withhold info from parents because of “safety concerns.”

Professional development course for teachers in Washington State run by national LGBT organization GLSEN.

July 4, 2022

 LGBT pronoun buttons for children are part of the indoctrination process supplied to teachers.

Unknown to the public, many states enlist national LGBT organizations to instruct elementary school teachers how to push transgenderism (both “gender” ideology and transgender behaviors) and homosexuality to very young children. In Washington State (and many other locales), this is done through state-run “professional development” sessions that teachers attend to keep their certification.

Here we have a report from a MassResistance mother who attended and confronted the instructors with some hard questions. Their answers were very offensive and revealed their anti-family radicalism.

Run by national LGBT activist group that targets schoolchildren

Elementary school teachers across Washington State were invited for the professional development Zoom seminar on October 28, 2021. This session was organized and run by the national LGBT activist group GLSEN, which clearly described what the training would cover.

 Online professional development seminar invitation sent to elementary school teachers across Washington State.

MassResistance has long warned about GLSEN – the “Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network” and its founder Kevin Jennings. GLSEN now has a presence in almost every high school in America (and many middle schools) via its toxic “gay-straight alliance” student clubs. It is one of the main disseminators of LGBTQ propaganda and sexuality materials to schoolchildren.

Back in 1996, MassResistance reported how GLSEN pioneered the dishonest strategy of claiming that homosexual programs needed to be in high schools to make students “safe.” But that was just the beginning. It later became clear that the homosexual activists intended to use that argument to expand their reach down to the youngest elementary students, and to go beyond gay and lesbian propaganda to include transgenderism.

Using GLSEN’s “Elementary School Toolkit”

The focus of the Washington Zoom session was implementing GLSEN’s “toolkit” for elementary schools titled “Ready, Set, Respect!”

 From the GLSEN "toolkit" for elementary schools.

“Ready, Set, Respect!” uses the cover of anti-bullying, “anti-bias,” and respect to push LGBT “family structures” and “gender roles” to young children. It provides “tools to support elementary educators with these efforts.” But this seminar went much farther than that. It instructed teachers to how normalize transgenderism in young children and gave strategies to keep parents from interfering.

The seminar starts: Separating kids from parents

A conservative teacher showed the invitation to a mother in our Washington State MassResistance group. The teacher registered, and the mother could then log in to the Zoom session. It got right down to business:

Identifying “trusted adults” kids can talk to. The session began with one of the presenters, a lesbian elementary school teacher, talking about the “support” that elementary schools should be setting up. The first step is identifying “open and accepting” staff members who can be the “trusted adults” with whom children can “safely” talk about LGBT issues – instead of their parents. In particular, this includes the guidance counselor, the school administrators, and especially teachers who put “LGBTQIA Safe Space” stickers on their classroom doors.

Helping with kids “coming out.” “We’ve actually had in my elementary school several fourth-graders come out since the beginning of the school year,” the presenting teacher said. “Some of them have told their parents about it, and some have not.” She said that she “walks a fine line” between helping kids be comfortable as LGBT, and having to deal with unsupportive parents who find out what she’s doing and accuse her of recruiting or grooming their child. This is a lot trickier in elementary schools than in high schools, she said.

Giving the kids LGBT books. She also said that another “quandary” with kids coming out is getting homosexual or transgender books into the child’s hands “that positively represent people they can identify with” versus parents who find those books obscene and objectionable. “Some parents can be really weird about that,” she said.

Ordering stickers, etc., from GLSEN. One of the GLESN representatives mentioned that teachers can order posters, stickers and other materials from the GLSEN “kits” to help with “barriers or complications that might come up” in working with children “coming out.” “You need to feel safe helping the students,” she said.

 The term "safe space" means being safe at school from the children's "harmful" parents.

Question from MassResistance mother: "Isn’t it better to work with parents and keep them in the loop? I don’t understand why you would want to keep secrets from parents."

GLSEN staffer claims that parents endanger the child: The GLSEN staffer basically answered that telling the parent puts a child “at risk.” She said, “A lot of students are not living in safe situations. So you want to be affirming in the classroom so that the student is able to learn and not putting the child at risk at home.” She said that if a child hasn’t “outed” himself to his parents, then the teacher is careful not to tell the parent. This includes not using the child’s “preferred” name and pronoun in front of the parent if the parent doesn’t already support that. In other words, the teacher makes a judgment that the parent is a possible danger to the child.

Response from MassResistance mother: She immediately responded:

But they are the parents! If their child is thinking about these things and is going through a “transition period,” they need to be brought in because it’s their child. They’re responsible for the child, the whole package. They’re part of the child’s world. So if you’re working with a student, you should also be working with the parent.

The lesbian teacher uses more LGBT talking points: The lesbian teacher answered by doubling down on the well-crafted (and offensive) LGBT talking points about parents being possibly dangerous to their kids.

When I was in high school, I had lots of friends who were gay or lesbian. I knew a lot of people who got kicked out of their house as teenagers because their parents were not supportive or OK with it. And I wouldn’t want to be the teacher that got a kid kicked out of their house because they weren’t out to their parents and I outed them. You have a responsibility of confidentiality to students just like a doctor or a counselor would have if they come to you and their parents don’t know. Yes, parents should be in the loop about things that involve their kids: If the child’s failing in a course, they should know. If the child’s doing great in something, or needs extra enrichment, they should know. But it you have a parent that’s very closed-minded, and potentially going to do physical, mental, emotional harm to that child if they find out, you have a responsibility to protect that child’s confidentiality. You don’t have a responsibility to the parent to out that child. Ethically, I just think you’re putting that child in harm’s way. I can’t find any way to justify that.

GLSEN staffer says “safety” is the priority: The GLSEN staffer added that the teacher might want to have a conversation with the administration about a child, but she wholeheartedly agreed with the presenter that “a child’s safety takes priority.”

MassResistance mother continues: She wouldn’t let it go:

Is the child capable of judging the parent? But more important, the parent has the child for the rest of their life, and teachers have them just temporarily for nine months or whatever. So I think there’s a missing step if you’re not connecting with the parent to help that child.

The answer uses more LGBT talking points: A GLSEN staffer answered that “In Washington state the law is very clear that the right to names, pronouns, and gender within the school setting belongs solely to the student and not the parent.” [NOTE: Actually the law only says that the child has the right to use a different name and pronoun in school. It does not prohibit disclosure to a parent.]

She also trotted out the unfounded narrative that “For transgender and non-binary kids, the rate of suicide and the rate of homelessness, I mean, it’s astronomical.” She added, “We’re talking about identity and not anything to do with academics.” (“Identity” is another unfounded concept which is foremost in these educators’ minds, replacing academics.)

About the “transitioning” of kids: Another GLSEN speaker started talking about the different ways that young children “transition” their “gender”:

Not every trans experiences the same things … They may wear the same clothes they wore before … they may change clothes. For me, I’m non-binary. My transition was changing my pronouns. But I dress the same, talk the same. … We’re talking about how that child views himself and whether that view, that identity, will be accepted by their parents or not, and whether that would put them in a harmful situation. It’s got to be the kid’s call. …

That was the end of the discussion. After that, the main GLSEN presenter went into a slide show about all the different ways that the “Ready, Set, Respect!” Tool Kit can help the elementary school curricula and activities.

Final thoughts

The LGBT movement’s frightening obsession with children and the lengths they are willing to go to achieve their goals are certainly revealed here. Their statement that parents who disagree or interfere with schools’ efforts to groom children into “transgenderism” are doing terrible harm to their own children should be scoffed at. But instead, it has become mainstream thinking in education circles and even among politicians.

Similarly, their statement that “transgender” children become suicidal when parents and others don’t accept their new “true identity” is the exact opposite of the truth. People often become desperate and suicidal when they realize that they’ve mutilated themselves chasing after a false and unachievable identity.

Note that the LGBT movement and the Left in general often lie about what “the law” actually says – so take care always to read it yourself.

And finally, keep in mind that groups like GLSEN are funded by major US corporations. For example, every time you shop at Target or Walmart you are helping to pay for toxic programs like the one described here.