KnowThyNeighbor.org

Priest pulled for refusing to support petition drive

The Rev. George Lange of St. Luke the Evangelist church in Westborough, MA chose to voice his opposition to the anti-gay marriage amendment by including the following statement in the September 11 church bulletin:

"The priests of this parish do not feel that they can support this amendment. They do not see any value to it and they see it as an attack upon certain people in our parish, namely those who are gay."

He got the hook as a result and was replaced last weekend by Worcester Bishop Robert McManus who scolded him to the congregation.  A Diocese spokesperson indicates that Father George will not be around for this weekend's Mass either (when petition's are scheduled to be distributed) as he is taking a "previously scheduled vacation."

It has been reported to KnowThyNeighbor.org that the Archdiocese is allegedly threatening local priests with the loss of their pensions if they do not support the initiative petition measure and lead their parishioners to sign it.

Reverend Lange, it takes courage to stand up to such pressure.  We thank you!

To express YOUR support for Father George and his associate pastor, Rev. Stephen Labaire:

St. Luke The Evangelist Church
70 West Main Street
Westborough, MA   01581
p. (508) 366-5502
f. (508) 366-6049
stlukesparish@charter.net

Read more in the MetroWest Daily News..

Aaron Toleos, Director

Government BUY the People

On Sunday the 25th, I went to the Wild Oats Supermarket in Saugus, MA, where I was greeted by a petition circulator.  I was presented with an Initiative Petition to allow alcohol to be sold in supermarkets.  The young man, Mr. Tiontee Johnson, explained how I needed to make my signature legible and added when I am done signing that he has another Petition about Traditional Marriage that he would like me to sign too.  "You know", he said, "if you believe in 'Adam and Eve.'"  He then added, "this signing on either of these just means you want it on the ballot, it doesn't really mean anything today."

Well, I signed the Petition to allow alcohol to be sold and asked Mr. Johnson if my name would be made public and was told emphatically, "No, these signatures go directly to the Secretary of State." Interesting...   I was then asked if I wanted to sign "the traditional marriage petition."  When I said no,  He told me that he was being paid $1 a signature and that it would really help him if I could sign!

I asked Mr. Johnson for a card (see photo) and he gave me his employer's business card.  In further questioning, I found out that Mr. Johnson is not even a Massachusetts resident but one of many that were bussed in from California and put up in hotels all over the Baystate and paid to collect signatures.  By the way, the area code on the business card is from Michigan.

There are TWO very disturbing things going on here. 

(1) The "people's petition" process in Massachusetts is being undermined by "buck a signature" out-of-state petition circulators all the while petition spokespersons like Kris Mineau continue to spout rhetoric about the process being an expression of "the people's" voice.  So cut the bull Kris and tell the good people of Massachusetts who is really behind this Ballot Initiative.  I wonder, is this where all the "faith based initiative" money is going?

(2) Signature gatherers clearly feel entitled to say whatever they want to get people to sign even if it is incorrect. So we not only have to worry about The Catholic Church telling people that same-sex marriage is ending civilization but we now have to worry about a "puppy-dog eyed" signature gatherer claiming that the signer is "helping him out financially" and that signing "doesn't really mean anything."

There is too much at stake for this to be allowed to happen.  Citizens have a responsibility not to be duped into signing and to hold the petition sponsors accountable for any fraud or deception that might be committed on their behalf by these out-of-state petition pushers.

If you have an experience like mine, report it immediately to Peter Sacks of the Attorney General's Office at  (617) 727-2200.

Tom Lang, Director

Will the Real Mr. Intimidation Please Stand Up

A comment by John got me to do some investigation on Mike Hood.

John, you're right.  Looks like Mike Hood and Dissapproves of Intimidation (DOI) are one in the same unless he/she can explain why the two share an IP address (which is recorded when you post).

And Mike/DOI, while you're at it, please explain why that IP address is also shared by these other posters:

• Fred Jones
• Alexander Klimeshov
• Hannah Rubenstein
• Robert
• Mike Roberts
• Kristine Wilson
• John

Looks like Mike/DOI has been quite busy as he/she has posted 54 comments under 9 different names over the last week.

So Mike/DOI, are you getting paid to do this or just so obsessed with eliminating the rights of gays that you feel you had to stoop to lies and deception?  I won't ban your IP because I really want to get your answer.

To everyone else, sorry for not catching this sooner. It seems obvious now that he was a professional plant.  Feel free to vent here.

State Sets Precedent for Posting Names Online

Want to know who owes back taxes in your town? Just visit the website of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue where the names of citizens owing delinquent taxes in excess of $25,000 can be found. Click on "view the complete list of tax delinquents" and you'll get access to a handy search tool that allows you to browse by name or town until you find someone you know.

The strategy seems pretty straightforward here... If you don't pay your taxes on time, the government reserves the right to embarrass you by publicizing it. Now, it's not like these people are criminals.  Many of them are probably paying a regular tax penalty that allows them to let the past due amount ride. So is resorting to public shame to collect a few extra tax dollars worth it?  I guess so since I haven't heard anyone calling for the site to be shut down.

Contrast this with KnowThyNeighbor's motivations for putting petition signer's names online.  A group of people wants to eliminate your right to marry.  They would alter the State Constitution to make it clear your family is inferior to others and in doing so would deny you access to more than 1,400 protections, rights, and benefits under state and federal law.  If they succeed, supporting your family would be more difficult, it could affect your health insurance coverage, and your family would experience roadblocks to inheriting your assets when you die.

I challenge anyone to explain why citizens should be denied direct access to the names of those who would sponsor legislation against them.  Can you imagine continuing to spend your money with a local merchant who supported legislation that would take rights away from your family? Citizens have the right to see this information and to use it as the basis for making personal decisions. Denying them direct access to it prevents them from meaningful participation in the legislative process and advantages their opponents.

Aaron Toleos, Director

Archdiocese Likens Same-Sex Marriage to Incest; Understands Violence Against Gays

I did a phone interview recently with The Pilot, the weekly Catholic newspaper of the Boston Archdiocese published by Archbishop Sean P. O'malley.  As a follow-up, I thought I'd try to find them online and came across the following in an editorial from their September 9 issue:

"There is no discrimination in not allowing certain types of couples to marry. Should mother and son feel discriminated against because they are not allowed to marry? Should a father and son? Should a young single woman living with her mother believe that they too should be able to marry? Why should a same-sex couple have their union recognized while others cannot?"

Now the Catholic Church is one of the primary groups behind this petition and they have a well organized plan for gathering signatures parish by parish.  So I think it's important for average citizens to have a full understanding of the principles espoused by the group with which they would be aligning themselves by signing the petition.

The Catholic Citizen group, headed by former Boston Mayor and Vatican Ambassador Ray Flynn, is also helping coordinate the signature drive. Their site references the 1986 "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons" as a document that substantiates their position against same-sex marriage.

So I went to the Vatican web site where I was able to find this letter in its entirety.  Here are a few choice quotes:

"Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder."

"It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs... But... when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase."

The section from which this latter quote is taken is extremely disturbing to me. Is the Church saying that hate crimes are bad but an understandable consequence of the gay community daring to protect itself under the law?  Nice. This letter was approved by Pope John Paul II on October 1, 1986. Please read it in full context and let me know if you disagree.

So people, don't overlook the Catholic Church's agenda in advancing this petition.  It's crystal clear to anyone that really wants to look and they want your help in making it a reality.

Aaron Toleos, Director

Encouraging Democracy Not Intimidation

The initiative petition process is the closest we get to direct democracy at the state government level.  It allows the citizens to bypass the normal legislative process to push forward legislation on their own. In effect, the citizens become the legislators. 

But that comes at a price.  Just as a state senator must weigh his or her own personal convictions against those of constituents when making a decision to support or oppose legislation, so the citizen legislator must weigh his or her own personal convictions against those of friends and neighbors. The state senator risks alienating a part of the constituency. The citizen legislator risks losing respect in the community.

Now as an average citizen, realizing how much power your signature actually has can be a little scary. I can even understand how someone might feel "intimidated" by such power being vested in them by our system of democracy. But in the end, what's really going on is that individual citizens are being empowered to make decisions that directly affect the lives of their neighbors with the middle man (the legislature) taken somewhat out of the equation. This is a privilege of living in a democratic society and must be taken seriously!

Therefore, don't just sign the clipboard because it gets shoved in your face outside Stop 'n Shop and you're in a rush.  Sign it because you fully understand the issue at hand, have weighed the repercussions on yourself and your neighbors, and truly believe the Commonwealth would be better off if the legislation was enacted!

We at KnowThyNeighbor.org believe that if the people of Massachusetts take the initiative petition process with the seriousness that it is due, reasonable people will see the petition for what it really is and decide not to sign it.

Aaron Toleos, Director

KnowThyNeighbor Reaches White House

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan was asked about KnowThyNeighbor during today's press briefing:

Q    Yes.  The president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, Kris Mineau, told The Boston Herald that the posting on the Internet of names and addresses of all who signed a petition to ban same-sex marriage is, in her words, "intimidation."  And my question, does the President disagree with Ms. Mineau?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think the President has made his views very well known when it comes to same-sex marriages.  The President believes marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman, and it is something that ought to be protected.  And the people of America, I think, strongly support that position, as well.

McClellan's non-response is a disappointment but it is obviously exciting to see that we have made it to the White House after being live for just 4 days.

And in case you didn't notice, yes, Kristian Mineau, spokesman for the group sponsoring the petition, was referred to as a woman (Ms. Mineau) in the reporter's question!

Sorry Kris, but you have to admit it's just a little funny. I can actually sympathize with you on this one though. I get that sometimes too.

Aaron Toleos, Director