The Engage Family Blog

Official Blog of The Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Posts Tagged ‘homosexual agenda

FPC Media Blitz: LGBT Ordinance Challenged, Abortion Linked to Breast Cancer, Sex-Change Inmate Wants New Prison

with 2 comments

By Nathan A. Cherry

 Below you will find some of the top stories making headlines in our country today. Click on any of the titles for the full story.

 “Abstinence Funds Dropped from Another Bill” Apparently those pesky liberal lawmakers have not learned anything from the conclusive studies showing the effectiveness of abstinence education on the mental, social, and academic well-being of teenagers. Someone’s flunking out.

 “Kalamazoo LGBT Ordinance Challenged” We are spoon-fed the lie that “everyone” wants to see sexual orientation and gender identity protected because it is the same as race or other classes. Here is a perfect example of reality; people challenging a city ordinance because they DO NOT believe these are equal.

 “What God has Joined Together” Data showing how faith can play a big part in the married life of adults. Thos who attend church as adolescents are less likely to divorce. So, contrary to minority opinion/belief, faith plays a big part in the life of a person. Maybe we should think about protecting freedom of religion more than freedom of “I don’t want to be a man; I want to be a woman today.”

 “Women With Abortions have Significantly Increased Risk of Breast Cancer” I guess no one told our U.S. lawmakers that abortion really does hurt women because they keep pushing abortion and abortion funding on all of us; despite overwhelming opposition against abortion. Wait a minute that could be because of all the campaign funding abortion (death) merchants provide. I get it now; money in the pocket is more valuable than women’s lives.

 “Serial Bigamist Allowed to Walk Free” Here is the next step if same-sex “marriage” is legalized. We will find ourselves paying tax dollars so courts can deal with ridiculous cases such as this. All while people claim defenses of “personality disorder” for why they were married five times. Don’t mess with marriage.

 “Sex Change Inmate Seeks Prison Move” What happens when “gender identity” is protected? An already difficult-to-deal-with prison system gets further complicated when the guy in the next cell that is living as a woman wants transferred to a women’s prison. Why? Because he thinks it will be easier to escape with all the women around? Or because of all the women around. I bet he is tired of looking at the guys in his cell block and would enjoy looking at some women for a change. How silly can we get? Next thing you know every man in San Quentin will want a transfer because he feels like a woman today.

 Stay up to date on what is happening in your country and world by reading the Family Policy Council’s blog: Engage.

 Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to the Family Voice, the official blog of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Have Motherless and Fatherless Homes Become a Good Idea?

with 3 comments

An article by Oran P. Smith of the Palmetto Family Council came to my attention yesterday and I want to pass along some of his sentiments and echo some of his thoughts. Read a portion of Mr. Smith’s article below, or you can click here for the full article.

       “South Carolinians know that marriage is an institution that predates the law and the Constitution. Nothing else besides male-female marriage makes any sense and never has. Marriage without a male and a female cannot be called marriage any more than lemonade can be called lemonade without lemons. It is just common sense that marriage is a union of two different genders, not just a union of two different people.
     South Carolinians know that just like with money, a counterfeit version of marriage devalues the genuine article. Yes, same-sex marriage does harm real marriage. Same-sex marriage is a strike at the very idea of the importance of gender in our society. What could be more socially revolutionary?”

 Mr. Smith is writing for a South Carolina based family group, but, I would gladly exchange “South Carolina” for “West Virginia,” or just about any state for that matter. I believe it would be easily verifiable that the majority of citizens in this country support the traditional definition of marriage. Consider some facts brought out by Mr. Smith earlier in his article:

-To date, 29 states have passed a marriage amendment, and 42 states have passed defense of marriage laws.
-A May 2008 survey showed that African-American people oppose same-sex marriage by a margin of 46 percent to 26 percent (Pew Research Center).
-A May 2009 Gallup poll showed Americans oppose legalizing same-sex marriage by a margin of 57 to 40 percent.

And of course most notably was the decision by residents of California, generally considered to be a more liberal state, to enact an amendment to their state constitution defining marriage as a union between one man and woman.

But the fight for traditional marriage goes much deeper than a simple definition. It is a fight to preserve the traditional family that has been the foundation for our society for generations. It is the fight to give every child the opportunity to be raised in a home with a mom and dad, learning the invaluable life lessons that come from each. And if you think this is just about the right to marry, consider this quote from lesbian scholar Paula Ettelbrick, writing in “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”

“Being [homosexual] is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being [homosexual] means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society.”

There is the true motive behind the homosexual agenda, the real intention that few are willing to admit. This is not just about the right to marry, this is about an effort to undermine all that America has stood for, and all that we hold sacred and dear. This is a battle for the mind of your kids. This is a battle to stop indoctrination in public schools. This is a battle to stop the revolutionary alteration of society.

Same-sex marriage will successfully create the largest generation of motherless and fatherless homes in the history of America, and society in general. And never before have motherless and fatherless homes been encouraged, so why start now? The negative effects of motherless and fatherless homes have not changed, the benefits of intact traditional families has not changed. Essentially I agree with Mr. Smith that it doesn’t make sense to “create motherless or fatherless homes on purpose? It comes down to putting the needs of children before the desires of adults.”

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to the Family Voice, the official blog of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Charleston Daily Mail: Kanawha schools should educate first

leave a comment »

From today’s editorial page in the Charleston Daily Mail, an excellent piece on the proposed KCBOE policy that would add “sexual orientation” to its diversity policy.  Read the entire editorial here; the heart of the editorial is reproduced below:

Discrimination is wrong, and teachers, of all people, should know this before they even step into the classroom.

To be sure, some students, particularly boys, do discriminate against openly homosexual students or students whom they think appear to be homosexual.

Teachers, administrators and other employees are already making it abundantly clear that such bullying is unacceptable.

For that matter, all bullying, for whatever reason, is unacceptable.

Or, as one parent put it in a comment to the board: “Students bullying homosexual students should be punished just as any other student that bullies any other student.”

The comments suggest that some parents fear that children will be indoctrinated into accepting beliefs their parents do not share. Many religions consider homosexuality to be a sin, which is their right, but it would have to be a mighty peculiar religion that condones harassment or bullying of homosexuals.

Written by Jeremy Dys

June 30, 2009 at 1:50 pm

WCHSTV Reports on KCBOE Policy

leave a comment »


A new addition to the Kanawha County Schools Diversity Policy has some up in arms.

Jeremy Dys of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia says, “We are concerned that the Kanawha County Board of Education is going to be holding hostage the paychecks of teachers simply for them abiding by their religious convictions.”

The board will soon be voting on whether or not teachers have to complete training that encourages tolerance of homosexuality. And Dys thinks that’s wrong.

“Forcing teachers to be indoctrinated on issues of sexual orienation against their religious convictions is unconstitutional.” says Dys.

(….Continue reading at….)


(Clicking on video will take you to to play video and read entire article.)

Written by Jeremy Dys

June 30, 2009 at 1:36 pm

Posted in Religious Freedom

Tagged with ,

Who’s Misconceived?

with one comment

By now, most of you know of our opposition to the Kanawha County Board of Education’s press to add “sexual orientation” to the policy manual for Kanawha County Schools.  The policy would hold the paychecks of teachers hostage in exchange for indoctrination on “sexual orientation.”  Teachers shouldn’t be penalized for simply abiding by their beliefs.

In today’s Daily Mail, Ry Rivard provides a balanced article on the issue.  In the article, he writes the following:

School system attorney Jim Withrow said there appears to be a misconception of what the policy does.

“It does not encourage, support or otherwise put forward an alternative lifestyle or encourage other types of sexual orientation,” Withrow said. “All it does is say and make a point of emphasis that we are not going to discriminate against and we’re going to protect people from harassment and discrimination and other maltreatment that may result from their sexual orientation.”

via Charleston Daily Mail – West Virginia News and Sports – Kanawha County – Diversity policy raises hackles .

Indeed, Mr. Withrow, there appears to be a misunderstanding, but it is not with us.

Many of you who have emailed members of the Kanawha County Board of Education have told me that some of the members are giving you a similar line.  They are explaining that you are “misunderstanding” or promoting a “misconception” of the policy’s intent.

We ask you to write them back and remind them that – if just for one question in an online training manual – teachers should not be forced to violate their conscience to promote a political agenda.  The KCBOE should stick to promoting reading, writing, and arithmetic, not promoting behavior that is unwise, unhealthy, and unravels the moral fabric of the family.

BUT, to be very clear, we quote from a GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) online publication called, “Four Steps Schools Can Take to Address Anti-LGBT Bullying and Harassment.”  Here are the four steps that the leading education arm of the radical homosexual agenda is promoting nationwide:

  1. Adopt a comprehensive anti-bullying policy that enumerates categories such as race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and gender expression/identity.
  2. Require staff trainings to enable school staff to identify and address anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment effectively and in a timely manner.
  3. Support student efforts to address anti-LGBT bullying and harassment on campus, such as the formation of a Gay-Straight Alliance or participation in events such as the National Day of Silence and Ally Week.
  4. Institute age-appropriate, inclusive curricula to help students understand and respect within the school community and society as a whole.


If you have been following this story, you will recall that this proposal began as an “anti-bullying” provision.  That’s step #1 above.  But, it soon morphed into a proposal to “train” staff to be sensitive to issues of “sexual orientation” (which, by the way, is yet to be defined).  That would be step #2 above.

What we can expect going forward is a press for Step #3, except that I would wager several Gay-Straight Alliance clubs have already been formed in the Kanawha County School system.  And, of course, the overall goal of step #4: “inclusive curricula” (like this one from California or this one from Massachusetts) for ALL ages of children.  Yep, that means teaching homosexual, bisexual, or transgendered behavior as normal, acceptable, and something to be encouraged for  ALL children from K-5 to 12th grade.

Mr. Withrow and the entire Board of Education are promoting a policy that places the best interests of politicians (see Del. Carrie Webster’s (D-Kanawha) letter in support of this policy here) over and above the best interests of students.  For whatever reason, they press this agenda while calling the taxpayers of Kanawha county “misconceived” in their understanding of what this proposal will lead to: teaching of behavior that goes against what is being taught in most homes in the Kanawha Valley.

Even worse, today’s Daily Mail article suggests that training on “sexual orientation” is necessary because state and federal laws on hate crimes requires it.  However, no provision in either state or federal law includes “sexual orientation” as a component of hate crimes.

I invite you to visit to read more and find the email addresses for Mr. Withrow and the entire Kanawha County Board of Education.

Share this information with them.  Let them know that the only misconception is their own.

Written by Jeremy Dys

June 29, 2009 at 1:37 pm

Commentary: Capture the Kids, Own the Future

with one comment

“It is the first fact of civilization,” says lesbian activist and author Patricia Nell Warren.  “Whoever captures the kids, owns the future.”

That’s an agenda the Kanawha County Board of Education (KCBOE) appears to appreciate.  Out for public comment now is a proposal – proudly endorsed by Del. Carrie Webster – that would add “sexual orientation” to the KCBOE’s “cultural diversity” policy.  The policy would require the KCBOE to actively recruit teachers based upon their sexual orientation and require its faculty and staff to annually undergo required training about sexual orientation.

One can’t help wondering what exactly is meant by “sexual orientation.”  Presumably, the KCBOE knows, but its members do not appear to be telling.  Perhaps they would like to identify which one – of the more than 25 different sexual orientations that have been suggested in the DSM to date – they have in mind.  Homosexual, bisexual, and transgender behaviors are certain to be included; polyamorous, asexual, or pansexual behavior may be as well.

While we await that clarification, what can KCBOE teachers and principals expect if this measure becomes school policy?

Well, for one thing, those teachers who object to the forced indoctrination that is “cultural diversity education” can expect not to be paid.  Of course, on paper, citizens employed by West Virginia’s public education system shouldn’t be penalized or discriminated against for abiding by their beliefs.  But in this case, the Board of Education has threatened to hold the paychecks hostage and force its employees to complete diversity training that endorses homosexual behavior – even between minors.

Forcing teachers to participate in such indoctrination even if it violates their deeply-held religious convictions is unconstitutional. Under this policy, teachers will be forbidden to respond to students who have unwanted feelings of same-sex attraction and are being bullied for wanting to embrace their heterosexuality; on the other hand, they must learn to be sensitive to students who feel compelled to engage in anal, oral, or manual sex with members of their own gender, just to fit in with their peers.  What’s more, principals will be required to encourage boys to pretend to be girls, and faculty will be forced to remain silent when bisexual faculty are given alone time with children.

Call me old-fashioned, but I believe the KCBOE should concentrate its collective efforts on improving reading, writing, and arithmetic, instead of promoting, protecting, and propagating behavior that is unhealthy, unwise and unravels the moral fabric of the family.

Parents – not professional educators – have the fundamental right and final responsibility for directing their children’s education … including their sexual education.  This new policy, though, will force teachers to endorse behavior that in most cases directly contradicts what is being taught in the home.  It places the best interest of politicians over what’s best for students —  especially for those young people dealing with feelings of same-sex attraction.

The classroom is not the appropriate venue for this politically-charged debate.  Del. Webster herself admitted in a letter to the KCBOE that this policy will accomplish in the schools what her political agenda has not been able to accomplish through the Legislature.

Worst of all, though, students shouldn’t have their sexual identity forced on them by either school administrations or the government.  Where is the concern for students who have unwanted feelings of same-sex attraction?  Students struggling with their sexual feelings can’t be expected to make good, well-informed decisions if they’re only hearing one side of the issue.  Rather than provide that kind of balance, however, the board is pushing through a deeply-biased policy that will deliberately recruit bisexual teachers to fill roles like P.E. teacher and coach (positions that supervise class settings in which students are especially physically vulnerable and self-conscious).  And the policy prompts these sexually-focused teachers to encourage students to embrace behavior that has been statistically shown to increase the risk of suicide among teens.

The Family Policy Council of West Virginia has offered – at its own expense – to provide local, state, and national experts who will provide an informed and thoughtful opposing viewpoint to this proposal so that the KCBOE can make a fully informed decision on this policy.  Yet, the KCBOE has repeatedly refused this offer, choosing instead to rely upon junk science and political special interests to achieve what are clearly its politically-correct, rather than child-sensitive, goals.

Whatever the deaf ear the KCBOE turns to the rest of the world, we hope it will still listen to the parents and taxpayers of Kanawha County.  We, therefore, urge you to contact James Withrow, the General Counsel of the KCBOE, by calling him directly at 304-348-7798 or emailing him at  Politely, but firmly, express your opposition to the proposed “cultural diversity” policy.

You have until July 1 to express your concern that the KCBOE is working to capture our children – and change our future for the worse.

Jeremiah G. Dys, Esq., is president and general counsel of The Family Policy Council of West Virginia,

Written by Jeremy Dys

June 25, 2009 at 3:27 pm

FPCWV: “Cultural Diversity” Proposal Undermines Parents, Rights of Conscience

leave a comment »

CHARLESTON, W.Va. –  The Family Policy Council of West Virginia called on the Kanawha County Board of Education Tuesday to withdraw a proposed addition of “sexual orientation” to its “cultural diversity” policies.  The proposal, which is presently in the public comment stage, would mandate that “all persons employed by Kanawha County Schools” attend orientation on “cultural diversity” and “human relations” as part of instruction on “sexual orientation.”

“Individuals who object to the promotion of homosexual behavior to impressionable children shouldn’t be penalized for those beliefs,” said Jeremy Dys, president and general counsel of the Family Policy of West Virginia.  “The Board of Education should be concentrating on improving reading, writing, and arithmetic instead of promoting behavior that is unhealthy, unwise, and undermines the right of parents to direct the moral upbringing of their children.”

The policy change would result in the promotion of homosexual behavior in district schools, including the implementation of curriculum and policies that affirm and encourage such behavior.  In addition, according to Dys, employees who do not complete the “diversity” training could have their paychecks withheld, even though that training would violate their right of conscience.

“Forcing individuals to participate in or promote something that violates their conscience to receive a paycheck is unconstitutional,” said Dys.  “Neither the government nor an employer should make people choose between their beliefs about sexual behavior and their job.”

Dys is encouraging parents and concerned citizens to contact school board General Counsel James Withrow at 304-348-7730 or to politely express opposition to the proposal.  The deadline for public comment is July 1.

More information on the proposal is available at

The Family Policy Council of West Virginia advocates for policies that embrace the sanctity of human life, enrich marriage, and safeguard religious freedom.  Advancing, defending, and equipping West Virginia’s families on the web at

Written by Jeremy Dys

June 24, 2009 at 6:31 pm

BOSTON: The Gay Prom You Would Not Want Your Child Attending!

with 5 comments

Many people are still not convinced that the radical homosexual agenda is much more perverse and dangerous than anyone previously believed. But if that is where you have found yourself, the story I am featuring today should convince you once and for all.

 “This movement has an obsession with kids, and there are no boundaries. It’s worse than anybody thought.”

 This is a statement by Brian Camenker of the organization MassResistance, a pro-family group located in Massachusetts that is fighting the homosexual agenda in their state. Mr. Camenker is referring to an event hosted by the city of Boston, held at Boston City Hall, and sponsored by the Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Youth, or BAGLY.

 What kind of event would provoke such a response? It was a prom featuring cross dressers, homosexual heavy petting, suspected drug use and a leather-clad doorman who teaches sexual bondage classes,” according to the story on World Net Daily’s website.

 The event was advertised as being open for students age 22 and down. And most likely your eyebrow just went up as you wonder what kind of prom allows college students and middle school students to attend together. Common sense says that 22 years olds and 14 year olds should be separated for everyone’s safety; but not at the gay prom.

 World Net Daily secret reporter Max, a 20 year old college student said that no one’s I.D. was checked and it was obvious that people much older than 22 were in attendance. MassResistance rep Brian Camenker wanted to know, “Why would 22-year-olds be mingling with 14 and 15-year-olds?”

 The answer is simple. As we here at the Family Policy Council have been saying, and will continue to emphasize: the radical gay agenda does not stop at the doorstep of City Hall with same-sex marriage. The radical homosexual agenda includes indoctrinating your kids with pro-homosexual ideals, and ensuring freedoms for pedophiles, polygamists, statutory rapists, and a wide variety of other sexual perversions.

 Events such as this are not simply to bring people together and have fun. The gay and lesbian community is actively seeking to indoctrinate kids as young as 12 and 13. The secret WND reporter, Max, even noted that, “he observed several adult homosexuals wearing T-shirts with “recruiter” written in rainbow colors.

‘The intention of these individuals, and of the entire event, is made plain by the slogans on those shirts,’”

 The very idea of this event is outrageous to me, as a father. To think that people would actively seek to expose and introduce kids to this kind of lifestyle is repulsive. And to add to the outrage is the fact that tax-payers helped fund the event since the sponsoring organizations were given a city police presence and use of City Hall. But don’t you know no such sanctioning would occur for a Christian organization.

 Every detail of this horrific event is disturbing. And the 20 year old reporter for WND came away from the event shocked even more than he thought he could be.

 Max said it is difficult for anyone who has never attended such an event to truly grasp the “perversion and disturbing nature” of the prom hosted by the city and welcomed by the mayor. “As a young person who has been exposed to many disturbing things within today’s youth culture, I believed I was prepared to deal with what I saw at the 2009 BAGLY Prom,” Max wrote. “Minutes after entering the event, I discovered that I was not.”

 Further Food for Thought: “Sexual Indoctrination Bill Vetoed”

 Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to the Family Voice, the official blog of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Written by Nathan Cherry

June 17, 2009 at 2:40 pm

First comes love, than comes marriage, than comes….triads to the marriage debate?

with one comment

When proponents of marriage suggest that if you redefine marriage, government opens the door to well-nigh anything, we are often accused of hyperbolic speech, alarmists out of touch with reality.  According to a recent story, maybe we’re not as crazy as they think:

Maine this week became the fifth state, and the fourth in New England, to legalize gay marriage, provoking yet another national debate about same-sex unions. The Lessins advocacy group, the Maui-based World Polyamory Association, is pushing for the next frontier of less-traditional codified relationships. This community has even come up with a name for what the rest of the world generally would call a committed threesome: the “triad.”

Unlike open marriages and the swinger days of the 1960s and 1970s, these unions are not about sex with multiple outside partners. Nor are they relationships where one person is involved with two others, who are not involved with each other, a la actress Tilda Swinton. Thats closer to bigamy. Instead, triads—”triangular triads,” to use precise polyamorous jargon—demand that all three parties have full relationships, including sexual, with each other. In the Lessins case, that can be varying pairs but, as Sasha, a psychologist, puts it, “Janet loves it when she gets a double decker.” In a triad, there would be no doubt in Elizabeth Edwards’ mind whether her husband fathered a baby out of wedlock; she likely would have participated in it.

There are no statistics or studies out there, but according to Robyn Trask, the executive director of Loving More, a nonprofit organization in Loveland yes, really, Colorado, dedicated to poly-education and support, about 25 percent of the estimated 50,000 self-identified polyamorists in the U.S. live together in semi-wedded bliss. A disproportionate number of them are baby boomers. Paging Timothy Leary: Janet Lessin claims on her Web site that shes able to travel astrally.

via The Daily Beast.

While it may seem quite the leap to go from real marriage to poly-amorous “marriage” while passing through same-sex “marriage,” it shouldn’t.  Perhaps it’s our post-modern ideas really messing with our culture, but if government can redefine marriage to mean one thing AND its opposite, what is to stop the redefining process?  Is the love of poly-amorous couples any less than the love of same-sex couples?  Do they require any less equal protection under the laws?  Will their civil marriage be any different than my religious one?  

Policy should not be set for a culture simply to satiate the desires of adults.  Marriage is marriage for a reason.  It is the best institution we know of for the development of a family.  Families the best for nations.  Nations for worlds.  

Extreme caution should be used when tinkering at the foundation.

Written by Jeremy Dys

May 7, 2009 at 6:39 pm

The Homosexual Truth No One Wants to Hear

leave a comment »

I am all for equality. But not if another person’s equality costs me my God-given freedoms. Freedoms like the ability to hold to differing views and opinions on social and cultural issues. Or the freedom to hire the people I choose without the fear of a lawsuit. Or the freedom to decline service to a person because it is my business and I have that right.


But the ugly truth is that the homosexual agenda is much more than marriage equality. If it was that simple I believe they would have their wish. But the truth is that the homosexual community wants immunity. They want the ability to say and do what they want without anyone telling them otherwise. And that is where their equality costs me my freedom; and I have a big problem with that.


Recently, Robert A.J. Gagnon, Ph. D., wrote an excellent article detailing the implications of the homosexual agenda for the “average Joe” American. (Click here to read the article in its entirety). I won’t duplicate the major content of the article here, I hope you will take a few moments and read it for yourself. The all-inclusive implications are astounding to think about and amount to a total brainwashing of independent moral thought.


I have listed, in short form some of the results that we would see should sexual orientation become a specially protected civil right.


1. Go to jail for “hate speech” Speaking out against the homosexual lifestyle could be punishable with jail time for everyone, including ministers.

2. Loss of job for non-support of “coming out” celebrations or even for any remarks that are deemed discriminatory outside of the workplace.

3. Pay fines and legal fees by your company for criticizing or otherwise not supporting homosexual behavior.

4. The removal of your children for teaching them any ideas deemed “homophobic.”

5. Endure, without recourse, the systematic indoctrination of homosexual appreciation of your children in the public school system.


And these are just a few of the catastrophic consequences of protecting sexual orientation as a civil right. More are mentioned in the article. But, quite frankly, these are disturbing enough.


Perhaps the thing that I wish more homosexuals would realize is that most anyone can overlook their sexual orientation decision. Few, if any will be quick to hate or judge because of that. But the reason many are so staunchly opposed to the homosexual agenda is that they want everyone around them to cheerfully accept their choice and affirm it. But that is not what tolerance and free speech are all about.


If we want to truly call ourselves a nation based on free speech and tolerance then everyone must understand that none of us has the right to demand that others agree with our ideals and views; to do so amounts to communism. It removes the free exchange of ideals, open communication, and instills fear into the hearts of people. When did those things become good ideas?


Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to the Family Voice, the official blog of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Written by Nathan Cherry

March 4, 2009 at 7:12 pm