For a brief analysis of the current situation in Loudoun County and other resources helpful for understanding anti-gay “Religious Right” strategy, see our Know the Foe page.
Organizations and legislators index
- Former Delegate Richard H. Black (32nd District)
- Council for National Policy
- Concerned Women for America
- Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio (Sterling District)
- Eagle Forum
- Family Leader Network
- Home School Legal Defense Association/Michael Farris
- Delegate Robert G. Marshall (13th District)
- Patrick Henry College
- Prison Fellowship Ministries
- Public Advocate
- Virginia Family Foundation
- Supervisor Lori Waters (Broad Run District)
Delegate Black was considered one of the most virulently anti-gay legislators in the VA General Assembly. He received a rating of “0” from Equality Virginia for every session of his office. His legislative record includes
- Chief patron of HJ 187, a resolution urging Congress to propose a constitutional amendment to protect the “fundamental institution” of marriage
- Co-sponsor of Bob Marshall‘s HB 751, the notorious 2004 “Affirmation of Marriage Act.”
- A failed bill to reinstate the Virginia Housing Development Authority’s “Family Rule,” which prohibited VHDA lending to adults not related by marriage or blood. Virginia was the only state in the U.S. to have such a rule, and the VHDA had voted unanimously to remove it in 2003. Black argued that “irregular households” were threatening to “destroy family life.”
In 2005 Black and Marshall co-patroned a failed bill to prohibit “homosexuals” from adopting children. Black brought in well-known fraudulent researcher Paul Cameron to testify for the bill. Cameron, who has no professional standing in the fields of psychology or sociology and has been publicly censured for misrepresentation and ethical violations, claimed that gay parents are more likely to sexually molest their own children. The Senate Committee hearing the bill declared that Black’s star witness had no credibility. Black also vigorously lobbied for a bill intended to allow local school boards to prohibit the formation of Gay-Straight Alliance clubs in Virginia schools, which, had it passed, would have violated federal Equal Access law. You can hear some of Mr. Black’s bizarre ideas in this interview with Concerned Women for America (mp3 download).
“The whole agenda of the homosexual movement is to entice children to submit to sex practices,” Black asserted to the Washington Times
In 2005, Black instigated a controversy over a student high school play that featured a sympathetic gay character. Without having seen the play, he sent an action alert to supporters urging them to protest what he called “the promotion of homosexuality in our public schools”, wildly misrepresenting the content of the play (for example, characterizing an implied stage kiss between two male actors as “a homoerotic sex act”), and suggesting that school staff should be fired.
Black was defeated in the 2005 election. He has “not ruled out” a return to local politics, although his failed attempt to secure the nomination for a special Congressional election in another district suggests that his career will not be revived.
Founded in 1981, this elite club for leaders and strategists on the far right has grown increasing secretive. They have no public website, and do not permit members of the press to attend their meetings or to even see their membership roster. Guests are allowed only with the unanimous approval of the executive committee.
Membership rosters have been obtained from time to time, and an archive of information is maintained by the Institute for First Amendment Studies.
Other articles have been published by Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the New York Times.
Local readers should note the numerous connections to Loudoun-based organizations, including Chuck Colson’s Prison Fellowship Ministries, Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum, Mike Farris of Home School Legal Defense Association and Patrick Henry College, and John Ashcroft and Donald Hodel, whose wives both sit on PHC’s Board of Trustees.
The 2004-06 Executive Director of CNP is Steve Baldwin, a former California Assembly member who now lives in Ashburn. Baldwin issued a press release in December 2004 which includes a letter in support of Eugene Delgaudio‘s interference with public school efforts to combat bullying, and a nine page “Report on AB 101 and the Gay Agenda in our Public Schools”. This document purports to expose the supposed “homosexual agenda” strategy of infiltrating the school system in order to gain sexual access to children.
Note: After the information below was posted, Equality Loudoun received an email from Steve Baldwin claiming that we distorted the story and are “unable to refute” his assertions about “the homosexual agenda.”
Baldwin has also published an article in theocratic right leader Pat Robertson’s vanity publication Regent University Law Review entitled “Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement,” which recycles the long discredited “research” of Paul Cameron and Charles Socarides. Baldwin reported at the time that Stanford Law Review had rejected his article, and this detail was then picked up by the press. The following appeared on World Net Daily, an online “Religious Right” media outlet:
. . wrote Steve Baldwin in, “Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement,” soon to be published by the Regent University Law Review after Stanford Law Review backed out. [emphasis added]
Note the implication that there was political pressure brought to bear on Stanford, resulting in viewpoint censorship.
As it turns out, Stanford Law Review didn’t back out of or reject the article – because they never saw it. The following is the response from the president of Stanford Law Review to an inquiry from someone who, understandably, found it hard to believe that they would have ever considered publishing the Baldwin piece:
Thank you for your inquiry, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to clarify this matter.
The article in question was never submitted to the Stanford Law Review for consideration, much less accepted for publication. [emphasis added] A search of our comprehensive electronic records of all submissions for the past 2-1/2 years reveals that the article was not submitted to us, and nobody on our staff recalls such an article. Furthermore, it is inconceivable that we would reject an article on the grounds that the story insinuates: It has not been our policy to reject articles for politically motivated reasons.
We have contacted the author and publisher of the story, and have asked them to take appropriate action. We anticipate they will, and that will end this matter.
President, Stanford Law Review
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305-8610
The reference to Stanford “backing out” was shortly thereafter removed from the World Net Daily article. Baldwin’s subsequent claim that he had been mistaken and intended to say “Stanford Law and Policy Review” was debunked by the editor of that publication as well. This rhetorical trick is very similar to the one Eugene Delgaudio frequently uses, for instance, his claim that the school system “backed off” from “pro-homosexual” curricula that it never had in the first place. The following is from the Americans United for Separation of Church and State article:
The CNP’s current executive director, a former California lawmaker named Steve Baldwin, has tried to downplay the organization’s influence on powerful state and national lawmakers. He has remained cagey about the CNP’s goals, insisting it is merely a group that counters liberal policy arguments.
In many ways, Baldwin himself exemplifies the CNPs operate-in-secret strategy. As a political strategist in California in the early 1990s, Baldwin was one of the key architects of the “stealth strategy” that led to Religious Right activists being elected to school boards and other local offices.
“Stealth candidates” were trained to emphasize pocketbook issues such as taxes and spending. But once elected, they would pursue a Religious Right agenda, such as demanding creationism in public schools. A spate of the candidates won election in Southern California in the early 1990s, but most were later removed by the voters when the true agenda became apparent.
A self-described “pro-family” group, with a focus on nationalism and traditional gender roles, they also refer to themselves and their allies as “natural family advocates.”
CWA opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment because it doesn’t go far enough:
America has federal laws to protect our currency because we recognize that counterfeit currency is a serious threat to our national economy. We must have laws to preserve and protect marriage because counterfeit marriage is a serious threat to the stability of society and the health and welfare of children. CWA opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) because it would not prevent state legislatures from recognizing and benefiting civil unions and other such relationships, which would result in legalized counterfeit marriage.
From a typical CWA article, “Talking Points on Marriage”:
It is wrong to encourage people to remain trapped in homosexuality. As society rewards homosexual behavior, more young people will be encouraged to experiment with homosexuality, and more will be discouraged from overcoming unnatural homosexual desires. If “gay marriage” is legalized, children in schools will be taught that this is the moral equivalent of true marriage and that one day perhaps some might “marry’ a member of their same sex. . .
. . . Unlike with race or ethnicity, homosexuality is in no way immutable or genetically determined. It is a chosen behavior. People need not embrace unnatural feelings, and many homosexuals have overcome “gay” desires and gone on to lead heterosexual lives, including getting married and having children. Science has produced no credible evidence of innate homosexuality. The most famous “born gay” study, by Dean Hamer, a homosexual activist researcher, could not be replicated. Thus, comparisons to inter-racial marriage cases, such as Loving v. Virginia (U.S. Supreme Court, 1967), are irrelevant and misleading. The very soul of marriage – the joining of the two sexes – was never at issue in Loving.
CWA was very active locally in creating the 2005 controversy over the Stone Bridge High School play “Offsides” and the demand that a policy governing school play content specifically prohibit what they call “the normalization of homosexuality.” Barbara Black, wife of Dick Black and a national CWA lobbyist, the legislative aide to then Supervisor Mick Staton (the Black’s son-in-law), and aspiring Senate candidate Patricia Phillips, then the Virginia state director of CWA, joined other CWA staff and activists in speaking before the School Board, all without identifying their positions and affiliations.
More recently, CWA activists tried to exploit the decision to remove a children’s book (And Tango Makes Three) from Loudoun County Public Schools as a national propaganda tool, urging their followers across the nation to deluge Loudoun County school administrators with emails. The decision to remove the book was ultimately reversed, and CWA silently removed an audio file from their website that contained absurdly false information.
Patrick Henry College/HSLDA founder Mike Farris is CWA’s past chief legal counsel.
Loudoun County Supervisor for the Sterling district since 1999, Eugene Delgaudio’s official county bio and website rather disingenuously list his day job as running a non-profit dedicated to “a program of limited government and reduced taxes.” Now serving his third term, Delgaudio used to at least pretend that his full time job as a professional gay-basher had “nothing to do with” his position in local government. That all changed in October of 2004 when he launched a very public campaign to dismantle the anti-bullying program in Loudoun County Public Schools. According to a “news” release on Delgaudio’s campaign/Supervisor website:
Pro-homosexual teaching lessons often seen in other schools’ social programs have been dropped from Loudoun County’s “anti-bullying” program, says Sterling District Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio.
[Note – School officials have firmly refuted the claim that there has been any change to the curriculum]
“Thanks to the public attention, the kind of pro-homosexual propaganda slipped into other schools’ curricula will not be coming to Loudoun,” said Delgaudio. “Schools will tell you they weren’t planning on indoctrinating kids with liberal propaganda, but it eventually happens virtually every time.”
A take-home survey to parents intended to shape the curriculum attracted Delgaudio’s attention when it included lessons on “sexual orientation” as an option.
Delgaudio contacted Sterling District’s school board member, Warren Geurin, in October to see if the kind of pro- homosexual propaganda seen in other schools would be imported to Loudoun.
“Bullying programs and other ‘social awareness’ programs are breeding grounds for radical liberal propaganda like that generated by the homosexual lobby,” said Delgaudio.
The survey in actuality was to assess parents’ awareness of a range of bullying behaviors observed by school personnel. One of the behaviors listed was “talking about a student’s sexual orientation.” Delgaudio enlisted the support of Council for National Policy director Steve Baldwin to defend his widely condemned statements. He has been a vocal advocate for viewpoint censorship in our public libraries, and was very active in the controversy created by Dick Black over the Stone Bridge High School student play “Offsides”, a play that portrays the bullying of a gay student and promotes tolerance. The following representative language is taken from a series of “constituent newsletters” sent to supporters:
At the same time they attacked me [for his assault on the anti-bullying program], an explicit “student” play was being organized by a high school principal, with the active help of other pro-gay rights activists implementing a defacto school board policy to condemn Christians and other traditional morality promoting citizens . . Strident anti-Christian pro-gay rights leaders and their misguided followers will swarm [the School Board meeting] Tuesday night urging the school board to encourage pro-homosexual plays, productions, surveys, curriculum and other propaganda . . Only a specific prohibition of previous immoral public acts, coupled with sanctions, can prevent another public display of sexual or perverse propaganda in a theatrical production . .
Delgaudio is a good example of a “stealth candidate,” as described by Americans United for Separation of Church and State (see the entry for CNP above). He initially campaigned primarily on fiscal issues, and did not immediately make an issue of his ideological extremism. His focus in county government has largely been to eliminate public funding for county services and encourage (exclusively fundamentalist Christian) faith-based privatization wherever possible, to “save money.” He has endorsed a resolution to dismantle the public education system, but his name has since been removed from the organization’s website. His former county aide Donny Ferguson, an officer of the Libertarian Party of Virginia, publicly endorses this position, as does his former appointee to the Loudoun Library Board of Trustees, Margi Wallo. Ms. Wallo was quoted in the Village Voice by a reporter covering the October 2004 “Mayday for Marriage” rally on the National Mall:
Wallo kept her beatific smile beaming as I asked her whether she would be in favor of civil unions or other legal arrangements in lieu of same-sex marriage. “It’s all semantics,” she said sweetly. “It’s not the goal to have arrangements. It’s the goal to destroy America.” Gay people, she continued, “are just being used. It’s between God and Satan.”
In early 2007 Delgaudio attempted to deny funding to LAWS, Loudoun’s agency that provides services to battered women and children. His premise was that the agency had endorsed a “political position” by opposing the Virginia so-called “marriage amendment.” LAWS, like its statewide counterpart and other local agencies, opposed the amendment because its broad language created the potential for unmarried victims of abuse being denied protective orders, placing them and their children at greater risk. It would have been a gross violation of the agency’s mission to not oppose legislation that was not in the best interests of the population they serve. This sort of childish grandstanding at the expense of the most vulnerable members of society is typical Delgaudio behavior.
More recently, as the utility of gay-bashing has decreased, Delgaudio has turned instead to immigrant-bashing. The language he uses to demonize immigrants is strikingly similar to the language he uses to demonize GLBT people.
A “pro-family” advocacy group whose focus is nationalism, anti-feminism and the maintenance of strict traditional gender distinctions in society, Eagle Forum led the anti-ERA effort which resulted in the defeat of that amendment. Much of their material concerns “judicial activism” and how jurisdiction over religious and social issues can be removed from the courts.
Lawrence . . poses the gravest judicial threat to marriage in American history. But the American people and the U. S. Congress have clear and extensive constitutional authority to countermand this decision. Given the current pace of cultural and constitutional deterioration in America, the exercise of this authority should be viewed as obligatory, not simply optional . .
. . Congress can, and should, remove from federal court jurisdiction issues concerning the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act. DOMA defines and defends “marriage” in the traditional Judeo-Christian manner
So says Eagle Forum’s Court Watch Chairman Virginia Armstrong, in one of many papers arguing that civil law should be based on the social views of the “Christian Right.” Dr. Armstrong is a legal scholar who also co-authored a position paper for the Dominionist group Coalition On Revival with PHC founder and former president Michael Farris.
Eagle Forum also uses action alerts to pressure elected officials they find too moderate to get on board with real “activist judge” Antonin Scalia’s culture war: “About the only things we find in the ‘middle of the road’ are a yellow stripe and a dead skunk. GOP leaders, take note!” warns founder Phyllis Schlafly.
Anti-gay activism by Eagle Forum is frequently presented in the guise of “parental rights” and attacks on “humanism” in public education and the NEA. This – apparently horrifying to them – description of diversity education is typical of the exposé articles in their Education Reporter:
“Respect means keeping our minds open. Having open minds means giving people freedom to be who they want to be.” This K-1 lesson plan includes a story about a boy who dreams of wearing a beautiful skirt of many colors. His mother helps him make his “dream skirt” by cutting up pieces of her own clothing and sewing them together. The boy insists on wearing the skirt to his daycare center where the other children either show bewilderment or make fun of him. He runs crying to an open-minded adult who gathers the children together and asks them why they are “making fun of Jesse.” The narrative demonstrates how the children build consensus through discussion. Ultimately, they decide it is okay for a boy to wear a skirt if it makes him feel good.
The Parental Rights Amendment and similar legislation was the focus of a June 2004 attempted takeover of the Loudoun chapter of the nonpartisan voter education group League of Women Voters by a group of right wing property rights and social issues activists. The federal version of this bill was drafted with the aid of longtime Religious Right activist Michael Farris.
The past Executive Director of Eagle Forum is Lori Waters, Loudoun County supervisor for the Broad Run district. In her capacity as supervisor she has focused on the privatization of government services, especially education. She has repeatedly expressed interest in managing the content of Loudoun’s public libraries. At the June 15, 2004 board meeting she attempted to place a content clause on library funding. Her past campaign managers and volunteers, as well as at least some of her county aides, have been PHC students and graduates. Her position on land use in the 2007 election cycle shifted to a new alliance with managed growth activists, and as a result she was one of two Republican supervisors who retained their seats. There has been no indication of a shift in Waters’ views on social issues, and she has been open about her aspirations for higher office.
Family Leader Network is another advocacy organization concerned about “Man/Woman Marriage,” “Decency,” “Abstinence,” “Parental Rights,” and other so-called “values” issues. FLN surfaced in Loudoun during the campaign to pass the Virginia “Marriage” Amendment, joining forces with Patricia Phillips and Concerned Women for America.
Failed candidate for Dick Black‘s former seat in the House of Delegates, Lynn Chapman, is the Policy Director for FLN (he did not include this fact in his campaign material). Chapman’s 2006 campaign was linked to a gay-baiting push poll deployed against his opponent, incumbent David Poisson. Chapman’s wife, Susie Chapman, was very involved in the 2005 effort to unlawfully prohibit any gay-positive viewpoint expression in student theatrical presentations.
Family Leader Network has recently joined forces with PFOX (“Parents and Friends of Ex-gays”), ADF (“Alliance Defense Fund”, legal arm of the Anti-Gay Industry) and the Montgomery County group trying to overturn the unanimously adopted expansion of the county non-discrimination law to protect transgender people. This is the group that staged a frankly idiotic “man in a dress” hoax in a women’s locker room to get publicity for the fraudulent claims they are making about the law. FLN previously joined with this same group to file numerous lawsuits with the objective of blocking a medically accurate sexuality curriculum in Montgomery County Public Schools.
The HSLDA, based in Purcellville on the Patrick Henry College campus, was founded by constitutional lawyer and former PHC president Michael Farris in 1983. He remains chairman and chief counsel of the organization. In building the HSLDA, Farris has left a well-documented trail of divisiveness and unethical, if not criminal, behavior, targeting and destroying non-fundamentalist leaders in what was at one time a vibrant and diverse grassroots educational movement. In one case, a Farris associate and client was found guilty in an anti-trust lawsuit filed by the publisher of an independent homeschooling journal who was put out of business and bankrupted. The vicious slander and harassment visited on this woman were tactics explicitly endorsed by Farris according to court testimony. Although Farris and HSLDA claim to represent the homeschool community, the organization in fact only comprises about 15% of homeschool families. In contrast to the HSLDA political agenda, which has little or nothing to do with the needs of homeschool families, the Organization of Virginia Homeschoolers provides accurate information and advocacy for ALL homeschoolers. This inclusive grassroots advocacy group has received no help or cooperation from HSLDA; in fact the president of the group describes his work as “doing damage control behind HSLDA.”
HSLDA is a member of the the “Arlington Group”, and is the only member organization other than Concerned Women for America that opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment because it would preserve the possibility of civil unions. HSLDA has proposed an alternative “Institution of Marriage Amendment” that explicitly rules out the recognition of any relationship status for unmarried couples, much as the Virginia so-called “marriage amendment” does.
Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither the United States nor any State shall recognize or grant to any unmarried person the legal rights or status of a spouse.
The FMA protects only the word “marriage”. The IMA protects the institution of marriage. It preserves for marriage and marriage alone the legal rights and status of a spouse. The IMA is clear. The language of the FMA is very confusing. The IMA stops the courts and the legislature of any state from imposing its will on the rest of the nation. It is the only proposal that will work to truly protect marriage. By its express terms, the IMA stops the creative attempts of the pro-homosexual activists and the courts from bestowing the rights and status of marriage on unmarried persons – period.
In this HSLDA action alert Farris explains why parental rights are dependent on maintaining the marriage status quo:
The right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children arises out of the historical nature of the family, which in turn is built on the nature of marriage. The traditional family institution has defined civilization for thousands of years, and our law and constitutional rights reflect this reality. If we allow our government to dismiss this special relationship and add to the list of recognized relationships same-sex marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships, or any other relationship they can dream up, we sever the ties to our heritage and cut the anchor line that secures homeschool freedom. No longer will we in defense be able to turn to the historical nature of the family and its rights, but we will instead be forced to operate within the notions of the modern political state. We must not let this happen.
And in this interesting 2003 testimony before a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitutional matters, Farris admits that the Federal Defense of Marriage Act is, in fact, unconstitutional, and explains why same sex marriage will inevitably be required by law:
(quoting Lawrence v. Texas) “the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice.” Let me put this proposition another way: the Supreme Court has determined that the traditional views of the majority of the people of this country are not good enough to justify law . .
. . the Supreme Court adopted the utterly unprecedented notion that a law cannot be held to be constitutional in the face of a substantive due process challenge if the state’s interest in enacting the law was nothing more than traditional morality . .
. . it will be difficult for a court to accept an argument asking for a public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause when that public policy is based on a motivation that has been labeled by the Supreme Court as violating the Equal Protection Clause.
Farris’ obsession with absolute patriarchal ownership of children (he won’t allow his own 10 children to date, preferring instead the concept of “courtship” under his fatherly dominion) has caused considerable friction at Patrick Henry, and Farris had to step down as president. Some of this came to light when PHC lost more than half of its faculty in 2006 over restrictions on academic freedom, and more during the Soulforce Equality Ride visit to campus in 2007. There is also considerable backlash to Farris within the homeschool movement, which many feel has been badly damaged by his egotistical behavior and narrow political agenda.
Farris is also listed as a member of CNP, and of the steering committee for the Christian Dominionist group Coalition on Revival. Apparently realizing how damaging this information would be to any campaign for public office (he ran for Virginia Lt. Governor in 1993), Farris has since tried to distance himself from CoR and to deny co-authoring a paper for that group arguing that U.S. civil law should be based on Biblical Law. The other author, Virginia Armstrong of Eagle Forum, refutes his denials. Farris lives in Purcellville.
One of the most outspokenly anti-gay legislators in Virginia (describing himself, only somewhat tongue-in-cheek, as “Virginia’s Chief Homophobe”), Marshall’s name is on the 2006 Virginia “Marriage Amendment.” Before that, Marshall was the chief patron of its precursor, HB 751, the so-called “Affirmation of Marriage Act.” The text of the bill as originally submitted states that
. . if ‘same sex’ unions are a civil right, then legal sanctions and coercion will be imposed against persons and institutions opposed to homosexual behavior or same sex unions. For example, schools in their Family Life and other programs will have to teach that ‘civil unions’ or ‘homosexual marriage’ are equivalent to traditional marriage; churches whose teachings does not accept homosexual behavior as moral will lose their tax exempt status; employers will be ineligible for government contracts unless they will hire and provide benefits to the “married homosexuals” and their “spouses” and “partners”.
The two year campaign to add the Marshall/Newman so-called “marriage amendment” to our state constitution generated a great deal of ink and pixels, much of which can be found on this site. Aspects of Mr. Marshall’s “thinking” that otherwise might have lain dormant have thus been dragged, twitching, out into the bright light of day for all to see. Many gems have emerged, but his admission to the Leesburg Today that the amendment wasn’t really about marriage is particularly instructive.
A marriage between persons of the same sex is prohibited. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created by such marriage shall be void and unenforceable.
Any judge who rules the provisions of this section to be unconstitutional shall be deemed to have committed malfeasance in office and may be subject to impeachment under the provisions of Article IV, § 17 of the Constitution of Virginia.
These bills were killed in committee, as are most of Marshall’s bills. He lives in Manassas.
Watch the documentary “God’s Next Army” (forward to 2:30:00 on the video). This 2006 documentary was made with the apparent cooperation of the college; it objectively tells the story of PHC’s mission and activities through the words of the students, parents and faculty, without passing judgment.
Located in Purcellville, PHC is a privately funded college for fundamentalist Christian homeschooled students. Established in 2000 by Michael Farris, its mission is to prepare a new generation of legislators and journalists to “lead the nation and shape the culture with timeless biblical values”.
They have been remarkably effective in penetrating the ranks of government. With a rigorous program that emphasizes scripted rhetorical performance, these students have excelled in academic competition and placement in government internships in the Bush administration. In the 2004 academic year, out of a student body of 250, seven PHC students were White House interns, one was an intern for the Bush reelection campaign, and one former intern was a paid member of Karl Rove’s staff. In a December 2003 fundraising letter Farris notes that this high rate of placement is evidence of the “strategic position and potential of Patrick Henry College”. Farris also discusses plans to establish “the first evangelical Christian law school within commuting distance of our nation’s capitol . . . to truly change the makeup of the judiciary”. Elite education is to blame for advances toward equality for all citizens: “In his dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas case, Justice Scalia urged the nation to recognize that we were being ruled by the ‘law school culture’. The law schools of the nation, as a whole, he said, had internal rules which promote homosexual rights”.
From the Patrick Henry Statement of Biblical Worldview:
Since any sexual conduct outside the parameters of the faithful marriage of a man and a woman is sin, any government which creates legal structures to encourage or condone inappropriate sexual activity or lust, heterosexual or homosexual, or which creates special legal rights and protections based on sexual conduct, is acting immorally and without authority. Pornography, because it degrades God’s image-bearers and incites sinful lust, is always evil and merits no legal protection.
The Lord is the author of the union of marriage, made evident when he provided a companion for the first man, Adam. This design resembles the unique relationship of Christ and his bride, the church. Therefore, marriage is a sacred God-made union between a man and a woman, which is to be separated by no man. It is to model the reverence, love, sacrifice and respect exemplified by Christ for his bride. Husbands are the head of their wives just as Christ is the head of the church, and are to love their wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Human sexuality is a great blessing created by God to be enjoyed within the context of a monogamous marriage between a man and a woman; any sexual conduct outside the parameters of marriage is sin.
The PHC “Notice of Nondiscriminatory Policy” contains this clause (a kind of “signing statement,” we suppose), and was the impetus for the Soulforce visit:
The College shall maintain its constitutional and statutory right to discriminate on the basis of religion in order to accomplish the religious mission of the College. The College chooses to limit its student body, board, and staff to those who are committed to its statement of faith. The practice of homosexual conduct or other extramarital sexual relations is inconsistent with the College’s faith position.
It’s curious, assuming that most of the PHC student body, board and staff have a heterosexual orientation, that “homosexual conduct” would have a position of greater importance than unmarried heterosexual relations on that short list, and that there is apparently no nonsexual “conduct” that would warrant discrimination “on the basis of religion.” Continuing this rather narrow theme, a survey of “Biblical references to homosexuality and marriage” has been helpfully compiled by a Patrick Henry College government major who is “working on marriage issues for CWA”.
In May 2004, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors presented PHC with a Resolution of Appreciation for “their commitment to the Loudoun Community through acts of service and civic participation,” and for anticipated acts “bringing distinction to Loudoun County as they shape the future of our nation”. In her remarks, Broad Run supervisor Lori Waters praised the students who worked on her campaign for being “involved hands on in community activities.”
Sixty PHC students volunteered on campaigns during the 2003 election season, mostly in Loudoun. “Those students are the reason I won the election,” said Sterling supervisor Eugene Delgaudio. Recently, as PHC is lobbying for a special land use exception that would allow a massive expansion of its campus, the administration has been trying to rewrite history, claiming that the college has not been involved in the local political process at all.
Run from its lavish Loudoun County headquarters by Watergate “hatchet man” Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship Ministries pays absolutely no taxes to our local government. This might not be a problem if they were actually a charitable nonprofit benefiting the community, carrying out the mission that they describe this way:
Prison Fellowship partners with local churches across the country to minister to a group that society often scorns and neglects: prisoners, ex-prisoners, and their families . . .
. . . Prison Fellowship reaches out to prisoners, ex-prisoners, and their families both as an act of service to Jesus Christ and as a contribution to restoring peace to our cities and communities endangered by crime.
It may be that they do those nice-sounding things, also. But what does helping prisoners have to do with the steady stream of anti-gay propaganda flowing from Colson and his colleagues? Did they run out of prisoners? An awful lot of their resources seem dedicated to chanting the usual dishonest talking points in unison with other national Anti-Gay Industry organizations, and repeating the same fabrications about our community. Colson manages to weigh in on every legislative issue, every court decision, every story related to GLBT equality, as if he thinks he’s running an anti-gay lobbying organization. He has repeated the blatant lies of the little Montgomery County group that thinks it should be legal to discriminate against transgender people; he has expressed support for the Massachusetts father who thinks he should be able to control every book or thought his children are exposed to; repeated preposterous lies about the Matthew Shepard Act and denied that the lives of GLBT people are negatively impacted by hate crimes; he advocates the useless and harmful “reparative therapy” that has been denounced by every mainstream medical organization; he would like for young GLBT people to be prevented from organizing support networks at their schools; he is outraged by the fact that gay couples provide loving, stable homes for children who would otherwise remain wards of the state; he repeats the curious notion that gay couples who want to get married are responsible for the irresponsible behavior of heterosexuals who create unwanted children and fail to take care of them; in short, there is no meme of the Anti-Gay Industry that Chuck Colson or one of his ghostwriters hasn’t enthusiastically embraced and repeated ad nauseum, through email alerts, mailings, blogs, symposia, etc.
Your tax dollars at work.
This is Eugene Delgaudio’s openly anti-gay lobbying/fundraising outlet, that was formerly in drag as a “small government advocate.” It now (since around 2004) acknowledges on the front page of its website the primary function of the “group”: “Public Advocate has become a leader in the fight for family values and against the radicals in the homosexual lobby who wish to tear down the American family.”
Executive Director Delgaudio is now serving his third term as Sterling Supervisor. His day job consists of staging anti-gay stunts on Capitol Hill and sending out lurid mass mailings targeting “pro-homosexual” candidates and policies. One typical mailing depicts two men kissing and demands that constituents call lesbian Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (no relation to Steve Baldwin, as far as we know) and “tell her to keep her personal sexual preferences to herself.” This one backfired badly on Baldwin’s opponent, who strongly urged Delgaudio to kindly withdraw his unsolicited assistance.
From a 2002 Washington Post article on Delgaudio’s successful stealth candidacy and other “job”:
In other mass mailings, Delgaudio states that “forcing the Boy Scouts to hire homosexuals is the same as being an accessory to the rape of hundreds of boys,” and, regarding adoption policy, “You’ll see two men hand in hand, skipping down to the adoption agency to ‘pick out’ a little boy for themselves”
A Public Advocate fundraising letter that was posted on a political blog on April 1, 2005 was widely believed to be a hoax. However, Public Advocate the same day issued a press release referring to the posted material as a “Public Advocate fundraising letter” and did not refute its authenticity. “We send out a lot of letters. I sign them, I write them,” Delgaudio told a local reporter. Some excerpts:
Tonight, after a long day of fighting the Radical Homosexuals, I just feel exhausted . . The radical Homosexual Lobby is more intimidating than ever.
Never have the Radical Homosexuals and their allies been so vicious, so powerful, and so well financed . . Never . . They have been strolling through the Halls of Congress handing out campaign “contributions” like sweet candy, and even some conservative Congressmen have taken the bait . .
This time we are facing an enemy who is riding high, and hungry for victims . . The Radical Homosexuals are trying to turn America into a perverted pleasure palace. They hate us for standing in their way, and they have vowed to defeat us.
Evidently, this sort of thing brings in sufficient small donations from isolated, frightened people that Delgaudio can pay himself a salary for churning it out day after day. Go figure.
Also known as the “Some Families Foundation.” A Richmond based lobbying organization associated with James Dobson’s Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, VFF focuses its efforts on “parental rights,” reproductive issues, censorship, and denying equal rights to GLBT individuals and families.
A typical action alert from VFF complains that the Virginia Education Association “is now working to redefine marriage for American families,” and is “promoting homosexuality in our schools” because the VEA supports repeal of the “Affirmation of Marriage Act” and has presented an award to the Richmond Organization for Sexual Minority Youth. Support for an organization that “provides support, education and advocacy to young people between the ages of 14 and 20 who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered or questioning” is evidence of the “VEA’s disguised homosexual agenda,” according to the alert.
One of The Family Foundation’s battles of the 2005 General Assembly session dealt with the “Gay-Straight Alliance” groups formed in many public middle and high schools. These so-called “support groups” are allegedly created for teens struggling with questions regarding their sexuality. However, in reality, these groups are opportunities for the endorsement of homosexual behavior as normal.
VFF joined with the Virginia chapters of Eagle Forum and Concerned Women for America, Michael Farris’ HSLDA, PFOX and other anti-gay groups in a coalition “designed to be the leading force ensuring the passage of the Virginia marriage amendment in 2006.”
Listed among VFF’s legislative “victories” are the defeat of a bill to repeal Virginia’s unconstitutional and widely ridiculed “Crimes Against Nature” law. This bill, in the words of VFF, “would have legalized private acts of sodomy.” Inexplicably, this item appears under the heading “Marriage.”
Lori Waters campaigned as an advocate for “families.” We suspect from her affiliations that this is meant to include only certain families. Waters is the past Executive Director (as of January 2005) of Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, described on her county bio only as “a pro-family, grassroots organization.”