by Citizen Journalist and Richard DePersio
(Must-Read: All; Updated: 2011: 10-20. 10-9, 10/2, 9/19, 8/25, 8/21, 7/27, 7/20, 7/11; Originally written:
7/1; "Addendum to Action Chain Letter 6" appears at end of "Offending with Truth." All material
is as fresh as a new born babe; even fresher {just exiting womb}: an update in 'OWT' Addendum)
NOW with SHOCKING MARRIAGE NEWS...PUBLIC SCHOOL KIDS EXPERIMENTING
with ALTERNATE LIFESTYLES...PELOSI, WE'RE STILL FINDING OUT
PREFACE: Our Request: Moderates and Undecided read from beginning to end with an open
mind...Warning: 1) New material may appear at beginning or middle or end or in new
"Offending with Truth: Addendum"; 2) Offending with Truth gets progressively more offensive,
for some, as you progress from beginning to end. Open-mindedness is especially necessary
when dealing with homo on a scientific-, psychological-, sociological-, theological-, political-levels
and with a fresh approach.
A recent Gallop Poll asked: "Is it your preference that government promote traditional moral
values? The results will shock most: 18-34 - 53%; 35-54 - 43%; 55 and older - 51%; out to lunch/
Undedcided - 10%. We aren't shocked. The younger get a bum rap!
We don't think that gov should legislate morality nor do we think that it should
legislate immorality! Social libs favor it but would deny while the in-the-closet social libs called
libertarians wouldn't favor undoing such legislation.
A few examples: 1) Ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." It should be reinstated pronto (be
fair; keep reading; be open minded). Gov and society shouldn't be in the business of condon-
ing and sanctioning that which is abnormal, immoral and aberrant (see below); 2) Legislation
of the 1960s-70s which endangered children with welfare mothers, further, it represents one
of the ways that lib congresses and judges have attacked and weakened traditional families.
We reiterate: endangered infants, babies, toddlers, children and teens (see below). Unwed
mothers should be encouraged to and unwed welfare mothers should be forced to give up
their babies for adoption for the sake of the babies! It often promotes divorce or the women
claiming abandonment in order to secure additional social services when the husband or
boyfriend is in reality still around (he isn't home or hides when the social worker makes the
required visitation - we are a compassionate people, we shouldn't be suckers {tax payer $$$s}).
It becomes a generational thing: there are many cases of children, parents and grandparents
all on the dole; an inappropriate environment in which to grow up. Unwed fathers shouldn't
enjoy visitation rights nor should their bastards and bitches lay future claims to their estates
(no matter how meager or plush). Since these children will be entering foster care or adoption,
the unwed father shouldn't be compelled to pay child support but forced to contribute to the
support of orphanages. Unwed mothers should be encouraged to give up babies for adoption even
if financially capable; (Be patient: the more offensive stuff is coming).3) When the 13
colonies became the thirteen states, most of them had a particular Protestant denomination as
their official religion, most of them didn't allow other denominations, required
everyone to pay a church tax to support the churches and
required membership in the church to hold a gov job. Libs distort what Tom Jefferson meant by
separation-of-church-and-state: for example, it was he who ordered that the school day begin
and end in D.C. with a prayer - just like the states. By the 1860s, all states had dropped these
laws and regulations except requiring that the school day begin/end with prayer (abolished in
1964 along with using the Bible to help teach English). "...in the three or so decades since the
Courts first mandated the removal of Christian principles from education and the public arena,
violent crime has risen nearly 700 percent, teen pregnancies have increased nearly 700 percent;
academic achievement scores have plummeted..."-David Barton, "The Practical Benefits of
Christianity." (Before you even think that Citizen Journalist is a religious fundamentalist or
religious fanatic: he is a deist; how dare congress and the courts overrule the Founding Fathers
on prayer and Christian principles in public schools, how dare they assume to understand the
U.S. Constitution better than those who wrote it!!!
Did we go off on an A.D.D. diversion!?! Adderall, please...
The movie, television and music industries generate the impression that over 90% of
13 to 35 year olds are lazy, unable to hold down a job and dying their hair purple; taking drugs,
disrespecting parents and teachers, getting into fights, having pre-marital sex, committing crimes,
etc.; are into rap and/or reggae and/or pop and/or heavy metal and watching trash on television
and the big screen which isn't so big anymore. (Be patient for Offending with Truth).
Nota Bene': Prior to the 1980s, over 50% of the T.V. sets turned on were tuned into the
number one rated show; today, it's below 30%. The so-called experts say that it is only the
result of competition from cable. Isn't it possible that as the quality of shows (writing, directing
and acting - listed in order of importance) had declined? (Five, ten or more takes,
pay us the big bucks and we can screw up lines with the best of them!) Quality declined between
1980 and the present and the shows became blatantly family unfriendly that people were moving
to cable not for even baser material but for news, sports, docs, family shows, old T.V. series and
movies.
Experts tell us that 13 to 44 year olds, especially, 18 to 35 year olds purchase the most
CDs and download the most music. How is it that Country and Christian Contemporary are
multi-billion dollar industries! They have Gold and Platinum records too! Maybe, not as many as
rap but someone must be purchasing them. Isn't feasible that 50-60% of younger people are
into crap while 40% or more are digging (where hip, man) Country and/or Contemporary Christian
and/or Modern Jazz! Some of who don't want their friends to know about it. What about all the
good kids, many of whom are members of church groups that you don't hear about on the news
or see in today's movies and T.V. (except when they're being made sport of).
This weeks edition (10/1) of "Religion and Ethics Weekly" reports that Illinois is about to
discontinue its $8 million in funding for "Catholic Charities" adoption/foster care program
(which constitutes about 80% of CC's budget for those programs) on the grounds that CC
will not allow homo and unmarried couples to adopt. Virtually everyone recognizes that
CC's program is outstanding.
This clearly represents discrimination against a religious (non-secular) organization
on the part of the state. It also violates the U.S. Constitution and State of Illinois
Constitution which prohibits interference with the practicing of one's religion.
Let's put the interests of the child first. Back in the '80s, feminist orgs maintained
that women could be super-women: have a successful career and be good mothers too -
husband optional. One of the founder's of the modern women's movement, Gloria Steinan
stated, "A women needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle." The hypocrite got married
in the 90s! They created the term 'quality time' because career women were feeling
guilty about not spending much time with their child: we suppose that reading to your
child once a month should suffice. Something most disconcerting - for them - occurred
over the past ten years: study after study showed that a child was best off in a mom/dad
household functional followed by mom/dad dysfunctional (!) followed by single parent
functional and, bringing up the rear, single parent dysfunctional; predicated on quality of
care and the percentage of the children that grew up to drop out of high school and/or
take up drugs and/or drinking and/or commit suicide and/or spend time in jail/prison and/
or etc. These studies clearly could be extrapolated to show that two moms or two dads
are not in the best interest of the child and its the child that we should be concerned
about! (Further down, please find our expanded definition of homo).
Is history about to repeat itself? As Yogi Berra said, "It's de'ja' vu, all over again."
Recently, the prestigious John Hopkins Medical Center held a psychiatric
symposium on pedophilia wherein the majority of speeches and those in attendance
held the view that these scum (there is nothing lower; even prisoners despise them:
placing them on the bottom of the totem pole {not P.C.? Too damn bad!}) were
born this way and couldn't help themselves!
The field of sociobiology is only a few decades old and is embraced by libs:
it makes excuses for bad behavior. Traditional biology tells us that congenital and
inherited diseases, skin color, hair texture, etc. are determined by genetics; it also
teaches that humans have the most developed brains are not slaves of their
biology. Sociobiology states that you can be born with a strong criminal gene
(therefore, criminals can't help themselves and shouldn't be punished too severely!),
a strong greedy gene, a strong nasty gene, a strong homo gene (homos can't help
being what they are (see last part of article for a scientific explanation of homos).
Get this: Sociobiology also claims that whether you're born with a strong or weak
nasty gene, it's the environment that will ultimately decide. Why not just simplify
matters and say: you are a product of everything that you learned in the order
that you learned it; you are a product of everything that you experienced in the
order that you experienced it; you are a product of everyone you have known,
especially, in most cases, your parents. Stop making excuses for bad behavior!
We predict that a similar process will be employed on behalf of peds
as was employed on behalf of homos. We have an abnormal psychology textbook
published in 1977 which includes homos as a type of abnormal psychology. In
the early 1980's, the American Psychiatric Association reclassified it as a "normal
but alternate lifestyle." What a difference a few years make! Decades of research
was sacrificed at the liberal alter due to pressure from the budding gay lobby
backed by the powerful women's movement. How can they call psychology a
social 'science'!?! It became the favorite topic of perverted lib daytime talk shows
in the '80's and '90's. When an audience member was critical of such behavior,
the host or hostess (not P.C.) would shout, "You a homophobe" or "We don't
pass judgement here." Libs are big on free speech - theirs! And, teaching one
point of view on issues - public schools! What effect did it have on viewers?
For a few years, the vast majority were shocked and nauseated followed by a
few years of mild shock and queasiness followed by the attitude that it is wrong
but acceptable followed by it is a "normal but alternated lifestyle." While
probably over 70% considered it abnormal, immoral and unnatural (with 20%
supportive, 10% undecided) in the early '80's, it is today roughly 60%, who
favor same-sex civil unions, and 45% who favor same-sex marriage. (People are
too stupid to realize that it's the same thing; it's just a matter of semantics).
Libs have done their Job! NEXT ON THE AGENDA OF RE-DEFINING AMERICA:
PEDOPHILIA!!!
And, another thing: sodomy. The dictionary defines sodomy as 1) anal sex;
2) homosexuality. It defines rape as forced sexual intercourse which is defined as
the penetration of the vagina by the penis.
Would someone please explain why those in the lib-dominated media refer
to men raping boys (in time, it will be acceptable if consensual on the part of the
minor! or if parent approves of relationship. Do you think us crazy? Look at the
history of homos) and prisoners raping other prisoners. Don't those who write with
crayons and those who read off of TelePrompTer know the English language or
is rape more PC than sodomy because sodomy to many has a negative
connotation and, therefore, using correct terminology is frowned upon.
Are women and minorities stupid, weak and do they lack pride?
A few days ago, Obama ordered that fed gov come up with plans to make
fed workforce more diversified (too many white males!).
Isn't it enough that for many years 10 points have been added to the civil
service exams for those with vaginas and dark skin! We have affirmative action
in the workplace, in the issuing of scholarships, the awarding of gov contracts.
We have lowered standards for women so that they can wear a uniform.
Some women and minorities no doubt truly qualify for the positions that
they hold but affirmative action is discriminatory and makes all women/
minorities look bad and is bad for efficiency. Who amongst us hasn't phoned
a gov department or agency and experienced the incompetence of unionized
gov employees or gotten the royal run around. Liberal social experimentation has
always been bad for America!
We need less gov and better gov. Novel Notion: Merit.
Obama certified that process of undoing 'don't ask, don't tell' complete; now, gays
can openly prance in barracks and elsewhere, in spite of, opposition from the top
generals in Army and Marines on Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, opposition from over 50% of
infantryman (the rest in favor or undecided) and over 60% of Marines and Special
Forces and their Spouses (see, Updated: "Action Chain Letter 6" moderates/
independents, please read with an open/objective mind). Gays trump Military Morale.
Thank you, Commander-in-Fruit Obama.
Texas: Bowie County Court Commission will no longer begin daily sessions
with the Pledge of Allegiance and a Prayer. Texas is one of the most religious,
patriotic and conservative states in the union. God or Nature forbid that a
taste of NYC and Los Angeles and San Francisco is making its insidious way
into Texas. If so, Ball game over.
In the 'Is Nothing Sacred Category': Recently, a gay
character arrived in Riverdale - home of Archie - where a gay pride parade was
held! The lib brain-washing of youth continues (See, "Someone Who Knows) Intruding
on the innocent. If they're going to do it - here's a novel notion: teach both sides
of the story: the lib and the truth. Young people cannot develop their cognitive
skills when presented with only one point of view on issues. And, now, the
gay Kevin will be spun-off into his own comic in order to reach more young minds.
The image of the United States generated for the world is produced in the
Northeast and the West Coast, especially, N.Y. City and Los Angeles (which
includes Hollywood). But they're not representative of most Americans. Their views
are being forced on the rest of us, including, our children!
Package: this and next four articles.
American history textbooks in California will have to include gay, lesbo, transgender history (What history!?!) and they can't be offended! Why should they be exempt?
A recent study showed that on average 65% of public elementary and high school
textbooks are negative about American history!
The truth about homos:
While over 90% of heterosexuals want to be parents, only 40% of lesbos and 20% of
gays do. If homos are born that way (5 % of all species of mammals are homo) they
are bad mutations in evolutionary terms for they would not be inclined to support the
survival of the species. (Why aren't evolutionary biologists and geneticists pointed this
out? Are they afraid of the gay and feminist orgs and lobbies? That makes for bad
science). We don't subscribe to sociobiological thinking.
Some consciously or subconsciously choose that lifestyle; others are that we because
of a traumatic experience early in life. Only 5% are afflicted with this condition.
Alternative: sociobiological nonsense. Members of the clergy and even practitioners of
psychology (See "More Reader's Choice") have cured homos when
they consciously/subconsciously so desire and are willing to work hard at it. There is
a third explanation for some of the 5% and this one has a basis in genetics. An infant
might have a virus which screws with the genes resulting in homo with some but not
all members of subsequent generations having the disease. This is the manner in which
particular inherited diseases originate in certain families.
It effects you. Los Angeles is teaching in first grade: a boy can pretend to be a girl
or gender-less from time to time; a girl can pretend to be a boy or without gender;
girls can wear boys clothes and the converse as well; boy can kiss and marry boy,
ditto girls. Claim: Reduce bullying. Reality: undermine Judeo-Christian U.S. Constitution
and encourage abhorrent, abnormal, aberrant, unnatural behavior (increase gay numbers
in order to give them more political clout). Plans are for it to go state-wide. So goes
California, So goes the rest of the nation, especially, liberal states NE, like N.Y. And, it
is making its insidious way into Texas and Illinois. Sadly, the image that the world has
of our country is largely generated in New York City and Hollywood!
(Full disclosure: Author is non-religious, moral traditionalist, deist).
ADDENDUM to OFFENDING with TRUTH
As we heretofore stated: Morally and Financially Bankrupt California Leads the Way for
States or Whole Nation. Don't be fooled by the apparent innocuous name: "Student Non-
Discrimination Act" which presently has 147 co-sponsors in the House (HR 998) and 34
in the Senate (s. 555). It will require in the already sexually explicit public school sex ed:
graphic description of homo sex (and may apply to private, including, religious schools as
well. It is the reason libs oppose school choice, they don't like what most private schools
do: don't teach homo or teach as sin). Purge religious references deemed by homo students
to be offense. It will necessitate math problems with homo characters and history classes
about the struggles of gays and lesbos against oppressive pro-family establishment. It will
encourage experimentation with 'different' lifestyles as early as first grade (read law). (homos
born that way, do libs REALLY believe that? Or, do that want to increase their numbers-see above).
Libs just love creating rights which are unconstitutional and don't exist in the Bill of Rights. Homo
students will be exempt from punishment for propositioning, harassing and sexually-assault-
ing their classmates.
Do you remember, Nancy Pelosi, saying of Obama-care: "Pass it to find out what's in it" ? We
are still finding out what's in it. It took a few decades to get marriage penalty (which discouraged
couples from marrying and encouraged living together) out of federal income tax. Lib attack on
marriage rears its ugly head again - this time in Obama-Care for poor and lower middle class to
be eligible it would be a disadvantage to have a married/combined income.
Legislating immorality: abortion; social programs; same-sex marriages; gays in military;
healthcare; exorcising prayer and Bible and Moral Code in public schools; mandating perverted
sex ed; so much more.
Human defined: 46 chromosomes; humans have 46 from conception. Body has to create
special hormones to prevent killer-cells in immune system from attacking germinal (fetus)
because it is not of the body - half chromosomes from mother and half from the father - -
unique individual. So much for the argument: It's the women's body and only she should
choose.
THE END of MARRIAGE as WE KNOW IT: H.R. 1116/s 598 is sponsored by 127 in the
House and 29 in the Senate thus far. It calls for the repeal of "The Marriage Protection Act"
which presents one state from compelling another state from accepting a same-sex marriage
and some contend that it implies civil unions as well.
This new bill will also pave the way for transgender and bi-sexual marriages and more.
The arrack on the sanctity of marriage and the traditional family continues...See next Addendum...
(Contact you members of congress. Don't know their names? Call 202-224-3121 and just supply the name of your state - you do know that, don't you? Also: name.senate (or house).
gov/public/).
ADDENDUM to ACTION CHAIN LETTER 6 (which follows; reading ACLs
1-5 not required)
On October 30, Department of Defense announced that military chaplains could perform
same-sex unions on or off military facilities.
There were a few states that still had anti-sodomy laws on the books; although, they
were no longer enforced. A few years back, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled them
unconstitutional. Justice Scalia, who wrote the minority statement, warned that this would
open a can of worms, including, leading to same-sex marriages. The vast majority of'
legal minds said that he was wrong. He was right.
The DOD decision raises some interesting questions. What about the "Marriage
Protection Act" passed in 1996: A state does not have to acknowledge a same-sex
marriage from another state. Many feel that it applies to same-sex unions as well. The
difference only being a matter of semantics. Over 30 states have laws and/or state
constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriages or same-sex marriages and
same-sex civil unions. While only a handful of Protestant denominations allow for
same-sex marriages or unions, would their ministers be allowed to perform in states
which prohibit it? Will we see that vast majority of chaplains sued for not doing so?
(Please read the article proper which follows with an opened mind).
