Thursday, August 13, 2009

MCPS Award Nominee Comments on Obama Award Recipient

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, aka PFOX, has nominated anti-gay professional Peter Sprigg for the Montgomery County, Maryland, Public School District's Award for Distinguished Service to Public Education. Peter is Vice President of Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, where he researches things you can say about gay people to make them look bad.

As the MCPS Board of Education ponders whether to give the award to Peter Sprigg, you might be interested to read Sprigg's opinion of someone who received an award this week from the President of the United States.

The President awarded sixteen Medals of Freedom to "agents of change." According to the White House web page, "America’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom is awarded to individuals who make an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors." One of the recipients was Harvey Milk.

Whitehouse.gov explains Milk's contributions:
Harvey Milk became the first openly gay elected official from a major city in the United States when he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977. Milk encouraged lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) citizens to live their lives openly and believed coming out was the only way they could change society and achieve social equality. Milk, alongside San Francisco Mayor George Moscone, was shot and killed in 1978 by Dan White, a former city supervisor. Milk is revered nationally and globally as a pioneer of the LGBT civil rights movement for his exceptional leadership and dedication to equal rights. President Obama Names Medal of Freedom Recipients

Other recipients were Stephen Hawking, Jack Kemp, Edward Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, Sidney Portier ... this is a lofty crowd.

It is interesting to see how our local award nominee sees the President's award:
A presidential medal based on a sex life

By Peter Sprigg

When President Obama today awards a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom to Harvey Milk, it may mark the first time in history that the nation's highest civilian award has been granted primarily on the basis of someone's sex life.

As the White House announcement explained, "Harvey Milk became the first openly gay elected official from a major city in the United States when he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977." Yet Milk served in that office for less than a year, so that hardly qualifies him for the Medal of Freedom. Milk was also assassinated in November of 1978. But that cannot qualify him for this award, either – San Francisco Mayor George Moscone was killed by the same assassin the same day, but he will receive no Medal of Freedom. At least lesbian Billie Jean King, who will also be honored by Obama, was a genuine tennis star.

But Milk is famous only for winning one election, being murdered – and having sex with men. In his "gay rights" stump speech, Milk once said, "Like every other group, we must be judged by our leaders and by those who are themselves gay." What can we conclude about the homosexual movement in America based on the life of Harvey Milk? I recently decided to find out by reading "gay journalist" Randy Shilts' 1982 biography of Milk, "The Mayor of Castro Street." A presidential medal based on a sex life

"Medal based on a sex life" -- that's exactly like saying Martin Luther King was awarded the Medal of Freedom in 1977 based on pigmentation.

You can read Sprigg's summary of Shilts' 1982 book if you want, I'm skipping over it. Harvey Milk had gay sex and potheads voted for him, it says here. If you're interested to know how Peter Sprigg twists it, you can follow the link and see this, I'm not going to quote it because I don't want to have this kind of stinking slime on our blog.

Skipping down... Sprigg concludes ...
But in the few months that Milk actually held elective office, "Harvey left little doubt that his term would be marked more by his unique brand of political theater than by the substantive tasks of the board," according to Shilts. And that "political theater" had mostly to do with advancing the homosexual movement – in his "political will," Milk declared, "Almost everything that was done was done with an eye on the gay movement."

In other word, it was all about sex. Pro-homosexual activists will describe the issue as one of identity – "who they are." But the real issue is one of behavior – what they do. And what Harvey Milk (like other homosexual activists) wanted was not only the freedom to engage in homosexual sex, but the right to do so without ever being criticized. Milk told one audience that "it is madness to ... be ashamed of the sexual act, the act that conceived you. ..." Yet homosexual acts never conceived anyone, which is what separates them, undeniably, from heterosexual acts.

Since Harvey Milk died from an assassin's bullet, over a quarter million American men have died of AIDS, which they contracted because they had sex with other men. What's truly "madness" is that someone whose only claim to fame is that they promoted such deadly behavior should be honored with a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Montgomery County Public Schools made a special exemption to keep the author of this article on the committee that advises them on content for the school district's sex education curriculum, after he had passed the limit of two consecutive terms. What do you think, will they give him the Award for Distinguished Service to Public Education? You can express your opinion to the school board by emailing boe@mcpsmd.org. The selections will be announced at their August 27th meeting.

27 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

""Medal based on a sex life" -- that's exactly like saying Martin Luther King was awarded the Medal of Freedom in 1977 based on pigmentation."

This is slander againsy MLK.

He won the Nobel Peace Prize by channeling the growing tension over racial inequality into a peaceful movement. He was eloquent leader who inspired hundereds of millions.

Harvey Milk's biggest accomplishment was to get the Jonestown tragedy off the front page of the SF Chronicle. Milk has only Dan White to thank for the fact that anyone knows who he is. White obviously got away with murder and that's unconscionable but that doesn't make his victim a hero.

Peter's whole article resonates well with me and it will with the those who vote in the Maryland Senatorial election in 2010.

Please keep publicizing it.

"I admit I am having a sort of feeling of cheerful vindication"

Hard to know why. The chances of Obama's healthcare bill passing get more remote by the day.

Two things are forgotten by the liberal press now decrying the town hall meetings.

First, these meetings were called by Congressional leaders to demonstrate grassroots support for healthcare reform. That Republicans can rally their supporters in overwhelming numbers to protest them is not a good sign for Democrats.

Second, the media onslaught defaming the protesters is not working. Support for healthcare reform is falling like a brick dropped off the Washington Monument.

Ramussen this morning is reporting that Obama's approval rating has dropped to 47% among all voters.

That's less than half.

Lots of suspected culprits.

Lack of leadership in delegating all work to Nancy Pelosi while he parties around the globe.

Favoring trial lawyers over health insurance companies struggling to survive.

Supporting the radical agenda of that Maynard G Krebs nut, Louis Gates.

But my favorite is when, after filing a brief in court comparing gay marriage to incest and bestiality, he kowtowed to the gay agenda and gave gay federal workers benefits for their live-in sex partners. Caving to gays doesn't usually win many supporters.

That seems to be the moment when things began to unravel.

Henceforth, that will be the explanation we'll promote.

Same thing happened to Clinton.

He came out pushing gay issues his first six months and wasted his honeymoon with the voters.

After 1994, Gingrich made the decisions for the rest of Clinton's term.

The only question left:

Will Obama be another Clinton or another Carter?

Democrats have so many wonderful models!

Locally, Spriggs will be getting an award and Grewell will have to push the new APA policy on counseling religious persons troubled by same sex attraction.

Why do you feel vindicated?

August 13, 2009 12:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And speaking of Martin Luther King...here's a quote from MLK's niece, Alveda King. She'd be appalled at all of the abortion worshipping that goes on on this website:

"It's especially horrifying that Dr. Tiller was shot in church. My grandmother, Alberta King, was killed by a Christian-hating gunman as she played the organ during Sunday services. Just as the womb should be a safe have, so should the church."

August 13, 2009 12:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Typo on above quote. It should say "safe haven."

August 13, 2009 12:30 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Hooray for Harvey!

August 13, 2009 12:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

... abortion worshipping ???

you might be thinking of a different site

August 13, 2009 1:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a plethora of quotes from this website, which go on and on and on about the glories of abortion.

It's funny -- when I first came to this site, I was dumbfounded when I found out that most of the people here support abortion and partial birth abortion especially. No matter how much I disagreed about other issues here...I thought that you would be completely against abortion. I thought that your hearts were soft.

I was completely and utterly wrong.

August 13, 2009 1:13 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

I have a plethora of quotes from this website, which go on and on and on about the glories of abortion.

Let's see your quotes, Anon. Don't worry about your comment being too long, just post your list with links to where on this site you saw each statement. This will be a good chance to make your point emphatically.

JimK

August 13, 2009 1:22 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...

Not to toot my own horn (oh who am I kidding) but I wrote something on Sprigg's latest silliness:

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/08/harvey-harvey-milk-gets-smeared-for.html

And about Alveda King, I give her points for ingenuity. If King was even my sister's mama's baby daddy's cousin, I too would be thinking of ways to gain status from the relationship.

August 13, 2009 8:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the 48 hours of June 15-16, President Obama lost the health-care debate.

First, a letter from the Congressional Budget Office to Sen. Edward Kennedy reported that his health committee's reform bill would add $1 trillion in debt over the next decade.

Then the CBO reported that the other Senate bill, being written by the Finance Committee, would add $1.6 trillion.

The central contradiction of Obamacare was fatally exposed:

From his first address to Congress, Obama insisted on the dire need for restructuring the health-care system because out-of-control costs were bankrupting the Treasury and wrecking the U.S. economy -- yet the Democrats' plans would make the problem worse.

Accordingly, Democrats have trotted out various tax proposals to close the gap.

Obama's idea of limits on charitable and mortgage-interest deductions went nowhere.

As did the House's income tax surcharge on millionaires.

And Obama dare not tax employer-provided health insurance because of his campaign pledge of no middle-class tax hikes.

Desperation time.

What do you do?

Sprinkle fairy dust on every health-care plan, and present your deus ex machina: prevention.

Free mammograms and diabetes tests and checkups for all, promise Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, writing in USA Today.

Prevention, they assure us, will not just make us healthier, it also "will save money."

Obama followed suit in his Tuesday New Hampshire town hall, touting prevention as amazingly dual-purpose: "It saves lives. It also saves money."

Reform proponents repeat this like a mantra.

Because it seems so intuitive, it has become conventional wisdom.

But like most conventional wisdom, it is wrong.

Overall, preventive care increases medical costs.

This inconvenient truth comes, once again, from the CBO.

In an Aug. 7 letter to Rep. Nathan Deal, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf writes: "Researchers who have examined the effects of preventive care generally find that the added costs of widespread use of preventive services tend to exceed the savings from averted illness."

August 14, 2009 8:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whew, Jim! I don't have the time to sit around posting all of the vile quotes on this site regarding abortion! I'll give you a sampling of a couple that came from you, though.

Jim Kennedy Quote:
"Conservatives, on the other hand, want to execute more people, bomb more innocents in foreign lands, torture and hold people without charges or representation, and at the same time whine that an embryo is a human life and that the choice of abortion is equivalent to murder and that that particular form of murder is immoral while the others are not."

Jim Kennedy Quote:
"It's one thing to oppose abortion, the religious radicals argue that it is equivalent to murder and it is a major theme, one of the major themes, of the Republican base."

August 14, 2009 9:42 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

I thought maybe you'd have at least one quote from somebody here about the "glories of abortion," as you say. You have none. We've been here for nearly five years and all you have is a couple of statements noting that abortion is a cornerstone of the Republican platform.

Both of my statements that you have quoted are perfectly accurate and defensible, and neither "glorifies" abortion, even remotely.

Sheesh, Anon, and I thought you had "a plethora of quotes from this website, which go on and on and on about the glories of abortion." You scared me for a minute!

JimK

August 14, 2009 9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous"...does that mean that your revulsion and anguish about statements made on this site that conflict with those you hold will
mean that you are not going to come here anymore to read the "plethora" of statements about the "glories of abortion"?

Goodbye!

Venus

August 14, 2009 10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim,

I believe that the blog administrator's beliefs on abortion is more telling than anyone else's statements. You continually defend abortion. They're endless Here's another quote:

""Abortion is murder"...good grief, does this guy understand that murder is a legal finding of fact? Oh, never mind..."

I do recall at one point you said that you would not want a child of yours to be aborted. And I was glad to hear that. However, how you can advocate something so horrific for others when you wouldn't do it yourself is beyond me.

August 14, 2009 10:51 AM  
Blogger Emproph said...

Peter Sprigg: “When President Obama today awards a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom to Harvey Milk, it may mark the first time in history that the nation's highest civilian award has been granted primarily on the basis of someone's sex life.”

Peter Sprigg:
-medal based on a sex life
-granted primarily on the basis of someone's sex life
-homosexual movement
-famous only for … having sex with men
-advancing the homosexual movement
-the gay movement
-it was all about sex
-homosexual activists
-the real issue is … what they do
-like other homosexual activists
-freedom to engage in homosexual sex
-homosexual acts never conceived anyone
-which they contracted because they had sex with other men
-whose only claim to fame is that they promoted such deadly behavior

1) If he really believed what he was saying, he’d be complaining that the award was for the promulgation of the “homosexual lifestyle.”

2) It would appear that he thinks about gay sex more than gay people do...collectively.

August 14, 2009 11:37 AM  
Blogger Emproph said...

“No matter how much I disagreed about other issues here...

I thought that you would be completely against abortion.

I thought that your hearts were soft.

I was completely and utterly wrong.”


Case closed, eh?

Just because people don’t agree with your theocratic, anti-contraception, ignorance only education, police state, shove it down society’s throat, highly selective definition of “pro-life,” doesn’t mean that they “worship” abortion.

Your accusation is out of line and I take offense to it.

August 14, 2009 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know about the "glories" comment by the other anon but it is true that statements by TTFers here reveal a moral apathy and nonchalance about the murder of innocent victims. These victims are also completely defenseless and dependent on society for protection and sustenance.

Being indifferent to evil may be worse than being enthusiastic about it.

August 14, 2009 12:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You said,"Anonymous":
"a moral apathy and nonchalance about the murder of innocent victims."
Should we assume from that statement that you were opposed to the slaughter of innocent civilians in the Iraq debacle? (Oh, maybe I got it wrong...they were, after all, adults who-- because of their different religious beliefs or social values that were definitely at variance from our Judeo-Christian moralistic values--deserved it?)

"Judge not lest ye be judged"

August 14, 2009 1:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea-not anon
Despite the adoration of the Showernuts and Anon-Peter Sprigg will not receive an award from MCPS. MCPS may not be all that it should be but I do not think they have sunk to giving awards to bigots.

August 14, 2009 1:29 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Anon, I don't remember saying it on the blog, but there was a time when my wife was pregnant and we got a certain amnio test result that implied that the baby might have Down syndrome. We talked about it and agreed that we would have the baby even if it did have this condition. Further tests showed the baby was fine.

We discussed it and decided, that's the point. I am not "in favor" of abortion, but I appreciate the fact that we had the right to decide for ourselves. I have talked with other parents who made the opposite decision when they found they would have a child with an irreversible condition, and while I may not have decided as they did, I respect their right to decide for themselves. If I were to have a "political" opinion about abortion, and I don't, it would be a wish that people like you would show that same respect to your fellow citizens.

JimK

August 14, 2009 2:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim -- Your definition of having respect for one person (the mother) means killing another person (the baby). The world is full of people who felt justified killing another person. Why should their decisions be respected?

August 14, 2009 5:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We discussed it and decided, that's the point. I am not "in favor" of abortion, but I appreciate the fact that we had the right to decide for ourselves. I have talked with other parents who made the opposite decision when they found they would have a child with an irreversible condition, and while I may not have decided as they did, I respect their right to decide for themselves."

Actually, they didn't decide for themselves. It was someone else's life who was being taken and they decided for that individual that his life wasn't worth living.

Too bad you don't have any respect for the person whose murder is being contemplated.

August 14, 2009 5:25 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Actually, they didn't decide for themselves. It was someone else's life who was being taken and they decided for that individual that his life wasn't worth living.

Kara Neumann didn't decide for herself. Her parents made the decision to let her die right in front of their eyes as they prayed for her recovery. They refused to take her to the doctor because doing so would have violated everything they believed in. Since you say you want to protect the innocent from death due to decisions made by their parents, I'll expect to see you advocating for the repeal of religious exemption laws, which allow parents to withhold medical treatment from their sick children based on their own religious beliefs. Kids with easily treatable diseases like diabetes, when left untreated die, because their parents make a conscious decision to withhold medical care.

That's what the Neumanns did. They believed prayer would heal their 11 year old daughter Kara so they decided not to take her to the doctor or to the ER, where some insulin might have saved Kara up to nearly the last moment. Instead they kept true to their beliefs, watched their daughter die, and have both been convicted of second-degree reckless homicide.

For the first time, the depth of the Neumanns' faith was revealed. With his Bible in his hand, Dale Neumann took jurors on a four-hour description of his journey from life as a young man who partied and drank hard to a family man who sought to walk in the steps of Jesus. Quoting scripture and speaking with great conviction, Neumann made it obvious that he had no regrets about his decision.

With three other children in the household and with a father who has no regrets about allowing his daughter to die, I hope the judge's sentence will protect the other children from their father, who seems more concerned with his own journey than with his childrens.

August 15, 2009 8:42 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

We remember Harvey 30 years later. Who will remember Peter Sprigg?

August 15, 2009 10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PROBABLY, YOU

August 16, 2009 7:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, Aunt Bea, I think that children who have diabetes and other treatable illnesses should be treated AND I believe that babies shouldn't be killed via abortion.

So what's your point?

August 16, 2009 10:54 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

My point is that in all the comments you've made about the loss of innocents, you've never once included children who've actually been born and done things like blow out birthday candles and make a friend. Your comments posted here at Vigilance have focused solely on the preborn, never on children who've lived and breathed and walked the earth but whose parents let them die without seeking medical treatment for them in order to remain true to their own beliefs. More than 40 US states have laws allowing parents a religious exemption to let their sick children die without ever seeing a doctor.

I'm glad to learn that you "think that children who have diabetes and other treatable illnesses should be treated" and I'd hope when you make your Anonymous comments on the internet about the loss of innocents, you'd remember to speak up for them too.

August 17, 2009 9:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay, Bea, I"ll easily do it your way. I think that no one, including mothers and fathers, should kill their pre born babies, babies or children, or let them die if they can be saved.

Can you say the same thing?

August 17, 2009 12:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home