Planned Parenthood Exposed

Undercover Student Videos Help De-Fund Planned Parenthood

United Families International

LOS ANGELES, CA - Undercover videos produced by Live Action Films were used to help strip Planned Parenthood of the $292,000 in taxpayer funds it received from Orange County, CA. The videos, part of the ongoing Mona Lisa Project, clearly show Planned Parenthood employees ignoring the sexual abuse of minors, which mandatory reporting laws require clinicians to report.

Mark Bucher, a local resident and board member of the Family Action PAC, saw the videos and decided to find out if Orange County gave taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood. Bucher proceeded to uncover an intricate money trail unknown even to the Orange County Board of Supervisors, and found that Planned Parenthood received funds through the Orange County Health Care Agency but was never identified as the recipient.

“The distribution of public funds to Planned Parenthood through the Orange County Health Care Agency appeared to be a deliberate cover-up since it was nearly impossible to detect where the money was going from the County to several different health clinics,” said Bucher. “After watching the undercover videos from Live Action, it became clear to me that Planned Parenthood has a lot to hide.”

Read the rest of the article here.

Two more videos exposing illegal actions by Planned Parenthood are scheduled to be released tomorrow.

You can view the first three videos here.

Porn Lawyer David Ogden confirmed as Deputy Attorney General

The vote was 65-28. Ten Republicans voted for him, one Democrat voted against.

Read more about it here.

Redefining Gender

Vote pending on 'gender identity' in Gainesville

Charlie Butts, OneNewsNow.com

The citizens of Gainesville, Florida, are set to do battle over a gender-identity ordinance passed by the city council.

The ordinance passed by the civic leaders defines gender as follows: "An inner sense of being a specific gender, or the expression of a gender identity by verbal statement, appearance, or mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth."

Passage of the ordinance caused an uproar because, in essence, it permits people to use public facilities -- restrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms -- based on their inner feeling about their gender. As Jim Gilbert with Citizens for Good Public Policy explains, that means men could use women's restrooms and women could use men's rooms. And outside of the obvious, that poses a real problem, he says.

Read the full story here.

California Initiative Proposes Abolishing All Marriage from Law

By Kathleen Gilbert, www.LifeSiteNews.com

California same-sex "marriage" supporters are collecting signatures to support a ballot initiative that would remove civil marriage from California law entirely, as well as the provision codifying marriage as between a man and a woman.

The "Domestic Partnership Initiative" proposes to categorize all unions simply as "domestic partnerships," while retaining all the rights of marriage for heterosexual couples, and extending them to homosexual couples. According to the initiative's summary, "Legally speaking, 'Marriage' itself would become a social ceremony, recognized by only non-governmental institutions."

Read the rest of the article here.

Updates From the Frontlines

Five states are currently considering bills that would affect marriage. The state legislatures in Vermont and Washington are considering bills that would legalize same-sex marriage (the bill in Washington would not actually call it marriage). West Virginia's bill would create a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Colorado and North Dakota are also considering bills about special rights for homosexuals.

Read more about the proposed bills and contact your state representative.

Parents Who Opt Children out of Homosexual Material Face Penalties

Christian and Muslim Parents Facing Possible Criminal Charges for Opting out of LGBT History Month

By Hilary White, www.LifeSiteNews.com

UK parents could face criminal charges for having removed their children from programs held at George Tomlinson Primary School promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Waltham Forest council has announced it will prosecute parents of about 30 children who did not attend a week's worth of lessons coinciding with "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month."

A spokesman for the council said, "At George Tomlinson, parents were invited to meet with teachers and governors several weeks ago to discuss what work would be taking place throughout the national LGBT History Month, and how this work would be delivered. Regrettably, some parents chose to remove their children from school.

"The council does not condone any unauthorised absence from school and action has been taken."

But parents who objected said they were told by the school there were no other options but to remove their children from classes if they objected to the content of the program.

Pervez Latif, a 41-year-old accountant whose children, Saleh, 10, and Abdurrahin, nine, attend the school, told the Daily Mail, "I wrote a letter to the chairman of the governors explaining that I would be taking my children out of school and he wrote back saying that there was no other option."

He said that parents had not been properly informed about the content of the program. "There was just a newsletter mentioning the week and that certain themes would be taught."

Two homosexual-themed books were read in primary classes: "King and King," about a prince who falls in love with another prince, and "Tango Makes Three," about two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who fall in love and adopt a baby penguin at a New York zoo.

Mr. Latif spoke of the disruption to his family: "My wife is very concerned she might be prosecuted ... I found it difficult to explain topics such as homosexual relationships at such a young age."

"I didn't want my children to be learning about this," he said. "If I am faced with court action, then I will just explain that these are my views.

Although the Waltham Forest council has not yet informed parents how they are to be punished, the council website says that parents of truant children can be asked to sign a contract, fined on the spot or taken to court. Councils have the power to jail parents for truancy.

********

Read the rest of the article here.

To those who say this would never happen here in the US, it already has.

Read more facts about David Parker's story here.

Responses to Same-Sex Marriage Arguments

Survey of Marriage Neutering Arguments

By The Playful Walrus, Opine Editorials

Here's a survey of some arguments we have heard from marriage neutering advocates, especially in California. I, and others, have dealt with other arguments in more detail in other entries, but I wanted to touch on these this week.

"The Courts Corrected Past Evils."

Assuming courts have only made correct decisions in the past (demonstrably false, but let's assume for the sake of argument) and, in doing so, did not reach beyond their constitutional authority in doing so, this does not automatically mean it was right for the California Supreme Court to strike down Proposition 22. If the court ordered the ACLU to pay me ten million dollars simply because I wanted it, would that automatically mean it was right, because the court has corrected past evils? There is no reason why this should be an issue for the courts instead of the voters.

"We're Being Treated Like Second Class Citizens"

The state, on behalf the people, treats different kinds of voluntary associations differently, and has requirements for various licenses. This is the only example I know of where people are claiming they are being treated as second class citizens because they aren't interested in obtaining a license on the established terms – which neither bar applicants on the basis of sex nor sexual orientation.

We are not telling you that you have to ride in the back of the bus. You are telling all of us bus riders that the wheels must come off of the bus because you get motion sickness. You don't have to ride the bus if you don't want to, but you should not be able to force us to change the very nature of the bus. It is there to move society forward.

**************
Read the rest of the arguments here.

Videos: Proposition 8 Oral Arguments

A brief summary of the case being brought before the California Supreme Court and some clips from the oral arguments in the courtroom yesterday.



Glenn Beck discusses why the people of California have a right to amend the State Constitution.

Update from the Courtroom

From The L.A. Times:

"Justices of the California Supreme Court seemed reluctant today to override the will of the people as expressed by the narrow majority vote to effectively ban gay marriage with Proposition 8.

Before supporters of the November ballot measure even got their chance to speak to the court in San Francisco, the justices appeared to be warning Proposition 8 opponents that their arguments that the vote should be invalidated could be viewed as an excessive use of judicial power."

Read the full article here.

You can get Twitter updates from the DNA or Protect Marriage.

Update: Find links to news articles and opinion blogs about today's oral arguments here.

Proposition 8 challenge begins

I thought Prop. 8 Passed. Why do I need to worry about it now?

From Goodsense Politics

Because the Governor, the Attorney General, the Legislature and the Supreme Court of California, along with the cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Santa Clara are all conspiring to once again overturn the vote of the people last Nov. 4th. The State Supreme Court will hear arguments and is expected to nullify Prop 8 this Thursday, March 5th!

.................

Marriage is not a vehicle for social recognition of morally taboo behaviors. It is a protected and honored arrangement designed to promote the raising of children in an ideal environment, the way nature intended. Prop 8 is not about denying rights to homosexuals: They retain every right that heterosexuals do . . . plus the right to a same-sex “civil union” that state law ensures is equal to marriage in all ways but name. They have no right to force the rest of society to change their moral convictions to fit their fancy. Twice, the people of California voted in fair elections for marriage to remain solely between a man and a woman. The government of California should abide by the democratic voice of its people and not tyrannically impose its will on them.

................

Finish reading the article and learn 5 important reasons why Prop. 8 should not be overturned.

*********

Oral arguments are scheduled for tomorrow, March 5, from 9:00am-12:00pm Pacific time.

Viewing Options for March 5 Oral Argument

Television Viewing

California Channel : this public affairs channel is carried by most local cable companies in California. Check local listings .

San Francisco: SFGTV2 (Comcast cable channel 78); Astound cable Channel 28; also available via online streaming to your PC or MAC from SFGTV .

Note: many local organizations and law schools are hosting viewing events that may be found by performing an Internet search.

Watch Online

California Channel : watch the live Web cast on your computer.

Public Seating
Public seating will be offered on a "first come, first served" basis to those in line outside the Earl Warren Building, 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA, before the doors open at 7:30 a.m. on March 5. Only 20 public seats will be available in the courtroom.

Satellite Broadcasts Locations in San Francisco
The oral argument will be broadcast live at various locations in San Francisco, such as the Milton Marks Conference Center, Lower Level, Hiram Johnson State Office Building, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, and at Hastings College of the Law's Auditorium, 198 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA.