Homosexuality And The New World
Order - The Casualties Of Selfishness - Time For "Safe And Drug Free
Schools" Czar To Resign – Fraud Obama Had To
Rely On His Community Organizing Group To Supply His Health Care Press Conference
Participants
From: rvte61@comcast.net
To: rvte61@comcast.net
Subject: RE: Homosexuality and the New World Order
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:01:35 -0400
Catholic Family News
CFN Interview
with Randy Engel on
“Homosexuality
and the
Introduction – Have you ever wondered how the Homosexual Movement has
come to be such a powerful force in American life today? How the movement
appears to be able to bend government to its will? How the movement attracts
millions upon millions of dollars from Corporate America? These questions,
among others, have puzzled me for a long time, so I decided to ask Catholic
journalist Randy Engel, author of The Rite of Sodomy (www.newengelpublishing.com) and an authority
on homosexuality in the Church and in Society, from whence comes all this power
and money and influence that the Homosexual Movement seems to enjoys not only
in the United States but abroad as well. – jv
John Vennari – For years, I have been unable to understand how and why the
Homosexual Movement in the
Randy Engel – There is no doubt that the Homosexual Movement, is
currently at the vanguard of organized sexual deviancy and that it has
tremendous clout and resources of all kinds, far beyond what its small numbers
would logically dictate.
From a historical perspective, we know that
the advancement of homosexuality is part and parcel of the modern Sexual
Liberation Movement, started in the late 1920s and culminating in the formation
of the World League for Sex Reform in 1928. The main theme of the League was
clearly eugenic – “race betterment through selective breeding,” – but
its platform also included the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and the
legitimization of sodomy as an alternative form of sexual expression. In
addition, the WLSR also promoted and lobbied for promoted contraception,
sterilization, abortion, population control, sex instruction for the young,
divorce and “open” marriages, pornography, suicide, euthanasia, artificial
reproduction, and government operated and medically supervised brothels.
Pope Pius XI responded promptly with his
great encyclical Casti Connubii
(On Chaste Wedlock) in December 1930, thereby successfully defending the fort
of Christian morality for another generation.
As for the Homosexual Movement in the
JV – And then came Stonewall?
RE
– Yes, and then came the Stonewall Inn riots of June 1969 which, we are told,
became the “flash point” of the Homosexual Liberation Movement worldwide.
Seemingly overnight, “gay” leaders spontaneously organized themselves into a
well-oiled political machine; they staged press conferences in major cities
which were covered by the world media, millions of dollars flowed into the
movement’s heretofore empty coffers, and leading public figures decried the
injustices allegedly suffered by homosexuals. What had been traditionally
viewed as a vice to be suppressed by government became a virtue and a civil
right to be protected and advanced by the State.
JV – I take it you don’t buy this
official version of Stonewall?
RE – Not for one moment. Events of this magnitude take careful planning and
coordination and a great deal of money. They do not occur by spontaneous
combustion. The Homosexual Revolution, like any revolution worth its salt,
started at the top, with the wealthy and powerful, and not with a group of
disgruntled clientele of transvestites, homosexuals, and young male hustlers
who frequented the small
JV – Do you have any evidence to back up
your claim?
RE – Yes. I
have, for example, the statement of Dr. Richard Day, a former Medical Director
of Planned Parenthood-World Population and a Rockefeller protégée, who, just
months before Stonewall publicly stated that “homosexuals will be given
permission to be homosexual.”
JV – Permission from
whom?
RE – From the elite of the “New World System.”
JV – I think we need to back up for a
moment. Can you explain the date and context of Day’s statement?
RE – Dr.
Day gave his historic speech describing the “New World System” to the
Pittsburgh Pediatric Society on March 20, 1969. Titled, “Family Planning:
Infant Mortality, Gene Frequency, Abortion and Other Considerations,” Day’s
speech described in broad strokes, the New World System which he said was
already in place and functioning. In his lengthy discussion of population
control, he stated that in the future there would be “sex without reproduction”
(aka contraception, sterilization, abortion) and “reproduction without sex” (in
vitro fertilization, artificial insemination). Day’s comment on homosexuality
followed on the heels of his prediction that “Abortion will no longer be a
crime,” – that it would be accepted as normal and be paid for by taxes for
those who could not pay for their own abortions. This was four years before Roe
vs. Wade.
JV – Can you cite another example?
RE–
On March 11, 1969, just nine days before Day made his statement on homosexuals
being given permission to act out, Frederick S. Jaffe, Vice President of
Planned Parenthood-World Population sent a memorandum titled “Activities
Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S.” to Bernard Berelson, President of John D. Rockefeller III’s Population Council. Listed under
the section on “Social Constraints” is “Encourage increased homosexuality.”
It is a matter of public record, of course,
that the Rockefeller family and its many “charitable” fronts like the
aforementioned Population Council and Planned Parenthood have been
promoting all kinds of sexual deviancy for decades including sodomy. The reader
may recall that it was the philanthropoids of the
Rockefeller Foundation that initially funded the pro-homosexual and
pro-pedophile research of sexual deviant, Alfred C. Kinsey, at the
JV – So what you are saying is that the source of the
Homosexual Movement’s power and influence was not generated from within the
movement itself, but from without – from the powerful foundations and other
entities that rule from behind the scenes?
RE – Exactly.
When discussing these powerful U.S.-based
philanthropic foundations, technically referred to as “privately organized
public institutions” there are a few things one must keep in mind.
First, there is nothing “charitable” about
these groups. They were, from the beginning, created by Andrew Carnegie and
John D. Rockefeller to be agents of social change and control, and they have
used their funds effectively to support a wide range of anti-life and
anti-family initiatives including “Gay Liberation.”
With their great prestige and virtually
unlimited and unrestricted financial resources, these foundations can go where
others fear to tread and pave the way for public acceptance of all forms of
sexual deviancy, until the time is ripe for the NWO elite to take over and the
particular deviancy in question is institutionalized as official public policy,
and the financial burden shifted to the shoulders of the American taxpayer.
They did it with eugenics. They did it with birth control including abortion.
And now they are doing it with homosexuality.
JV – Didn’t a group of billionaire
insiders meet secretly late this spring to discuss increasing their
philanthropic output?
RE –
You’re probably referring to the May 5, 2009 meeting held at
JV – What other groups besides these
large foundations are supporting the Gay Liberation Movement today?
RE –
One of the largest sources of support for the Homosexual Movement and Gay
Agenda is Corporate America – Coke-Cola, Pepsi, Ford (Globe),
General Motors, American Express, Best Buy, Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae,
Mellon Financial, Shell, Dell, Avon, Estee Lauder, Coors, General Electric,
General Mills, Kraft, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Hyatt, State farm,
Avis, Starbucks, Subway, Gameboy, Ikea,
JC Penney, Sears, Sam’s Club, Target, Wal-Mart (Pride), Weight Watchers, IBM, Intell, AT&T, and on and on.
I suspect, although I cannot prove, that
virtually all major
The Federal government, of course, has done
its part to advance the Homosexual agenda. Among the Federal Agencies and
programs that have supported the Homosexual Movement are the Center for Disease
Control, CETA (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act), the National
Institutes of Health, Legal Services Corporation, National Park Service,
National Public Radio (funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting), to
name but a few. The Internal Revenue Service has awarded the 501 (c) (3) tax
deductible status to homosexual organizations that
“foster an understanding and tolerance of homosexuals.”
When you add the power of the liberal mass
media that has always backed the Homosexual Movement, you’re looking at one
powerful propaganda machine.
JV – Did the AIDS crisis hinder or help
the Homosexual Movement?
RE –
In terms of finances, government-sponsored AIDS programs proved to be the goose
that laid the golden egg, and millions of dollars of “health” funds has made
their way into homosexual political/activist organizations. AIDS has the added
“benefit” of helping to reduce the “surplus population,” in keeping with the
New World Order’s relentless campaign against
the proliferation of people. Unfortunately, the useful idiots that dominate the
“gay” leadership have yet to figure that out, or if they have, they are silent
so as not to loose their salaries, or possibly their lives.
JV – How about financial aid and support
from churches?
RE –
That question would require a book to answer, but yes, almost all liberal
mainline churches, synagogues, and religious orders contribute financially and
in other ways to promote and sustain the Homosexual Movement. That would
include the American Catholic Church especially the bishops’ bureaucracy, the
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Finally, I would like to mention the role
that Organized Crime, as a functionary of the NWO, plays in supporting the
Homosexual Movement. There is a symbiotic relationship between the two since
criminal syndicates own many homosexual-frequented establishments such as “gay”
bars and baths. Organized Crime also supplies drugs, pornography and young male
prostitutes which are staples of the homosexual anti-culture.
JV – I can understand why Organized Crime would have a vested interest in promoting
and funding the Homosexual Movement. I can also understand, given the large
amount of disposable income that many homosexual have, why the movement would
attract some support from Corporate
RE –
Again, John, I’d need a book to answer that question thoroughly, but let me
give you a simple response by referring back once again to Dr. Richard Day’s
speech on the New World System.
According to Day, the sine quo non of the New World Order is population control. While
we pro-lifers generally associate population control with contraception,
abortion, sterilization and the like, this is a very limited view of the
meaning of the term. Day makes it very clear that for the Puppet Masters of the
NWO, population control has a much broader meaning. It means total control over
every aspect of human life – education, economics and finances, religion,
entertainment, transportation, medicine, the arts, national defense, politics,
medicine, science and technology, sports, law enforcement, agriculture and
farming, and ultimately, who shall live and who shall die.
JV – So population control is, in fact,
people control?
RE – Correct.
JV – Alright then, how does homosexuality fit into the
NWO scheme?
RE – Well, first
let me state that there have always been two natural enemies of totalitarianism
of any stripe – the family and religion. The advancement of homosexuality and
other forms of deviant sexual behavior, as we have seen from the current battle
over “gay marriage,” is designed to undermine both marriage
and family, as well as the natural law and traditional morality. The goal of
the NWO is to create a generation of polymorphous perverts – narcissistic, isolated
and rootless individuals who, being enslaved by their own unnatural passions,
will not present any serious opposition to their new slave masters.
JV – Once this goal is achieved, will homosexuals
continue to play a special role in the NWO?
RE – No. This is
highly unlikely. As Dr. Day made quite clear, the NWO prides itself on
stability and loyalty to the New Order and homosexuals are notoriously unstable
and unreliable. So, having served their purpose, when the time comes, they will
be systematically eliminated as enemies of the state.
JV – Randy, you have painted a rather
bleak scenario of life under the
RE –
As I document in my latest book, The Rite of Sodomy
(www.newengelpublishing.com), thus far, the Church has been unwilling or unable
to stem the tide of homosexuality both within its own ranks and in society at
large. Resistance to so-called “gay marriage” and other abominations has come
from individual traditional Catholics, from Evangelicals, and other concerned
citizens.
As for leading an organized opposition to
the NWO, as Day stated in 1969, “You think the churches will oppose us. I tell
you they will help us.” And he did not make any exception for the post-Conciliar Catholic Church.
JV – Recently, I read for the first time,
the complete transcript of “The New Order of Barbarians,” which contains the
recollections of Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, a Pittsburgh
pro-life pediatrician who was in attendance at Day’s infamous lecture in March
1979, as well as Dr. Dunegan’s interview with you on
the NWO. The accuracy of his predictions chilled me to the bone. Is that
transcript available to CFN readers on the internet?
RE –
Yes, the U.S. Coalition for Life has just posted the official transcript of Dr.
Dunegan’s report on the Day talk, free of charge, on
its Research Library webpage at http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=89&action=inline.
An audio boxed set of the text (CD or audio cassette) is also available from
the USCL,
JV – Are you discouraged by the fact that
virtually every prediction made by Dr. Day in 1969 concerning the NWO has come
to past?
RE –
I would be lying if I said that the anti-Christian agenda of the NWO does not
concern me. It should concern every Catholic, indeed every human being on this
planet.
But I also know that God is still in charge
of the world. As we read in The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis,
“… For man proposes, but God disposes; neither is the way of man in his
own hands.”
I do not know what the future holds for us
on this earth, but I firmly believe that as a member of the Church Militant, if
we put our faith in Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother,
humanity’s solitary boast, we shall not be disappointed and the final victory
will be ours. Alto quien vive!!
JV – Which means?
RE –
Loosely translated it means “Anyone on the battlefield who is still alive,
stand up and fight!!”
Notes:
- For ordering
information and reviews on The Rite of Sodomy see the new website
at www.newengelpublishing.com.
- The text of
the “New Order of Barbarians” is available at http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=89&action=inline.
August 2009
Contact Randy Engel at rvte61@comcast.net
Subscription information for CFN is
available at
http://www.cfnews.org/CFN-Subscribe.htm.
http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog.php?id=2788
|
THE
CASUALTIES OF SELFISHNESS |
|
|
Over the past 40 or so years,
a desensitization of conscience has occurred. This tragic turn of events is
often not recognized in those places of influence where public policies are
forged. And younger individuals don’t realize that they are part of a growing
trend in murderous solutions to otherwise pesky human problems. 44 years ago, it became the
law of the land. Based on the fancy footwork and political agenda of members
of the United States Supreme Court, chemical pollution of the human body —
the practice of birth control — became equated with a right to
privacy. Establishing the stepping stones from contraception for married
couples to contraception for the unmarried to abortion on demand wasn’t as
clear at the time. Now it is painfully obvious. The case that started it all
was Griswold v. Connecticut.
As professors Robert P. George and David L. Tubbs explained, …the Supreme Court soon
transformed the “right to privacy” (the reference to marriage quickly
disappeared) into a powerful tool for making public policy. In Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), the Court
changed a right of spouses — justified in Griswold precisely by
reference to the importance of marriage — into a right of unmarried adults
to buy and use contraceptives. Then, in a move that plunged the United States
into a “culture war,” the Court ruled in Roe v. Wade and Doe v.
Bolton (1973) that this generalized “right to privacy” also encompassed a
woman’s virtually unrestricted right to have an abortion. The aftermath is obvious.
Contraceptives became popular to entire generations of Americans. These
chemicals and devices were easily marketed to the vulnerable and the ignorant
under the guise of a mythical right to do whatever one wished sexually as
long as some sort of “protection” was being used. Respect for self and loved
ones went out the window in favor of one-night stands, illicit affairs and
worse. “It’s all about me” became the slogan of choice. The result was that a
so-called unplanned pregnancy became synonymous with a health problem that
required a quick fix. A couple, upon learning they had conceived a baby, were
(and are) horrified. Sometimes the mother wants the baby and the father does
not. Sometimes it’s the other way around. And sometimes it’s the grandparents
who don’t want the baby to be born. Regardless of the situation, the preborn
child, who should be welcomed and accepted into the human family, is rejected
and must be eliminated. In other words, the
unquestionable respect due every human person, simply and only because the
individual is a human being, slowly became nothing more than an arcane
concept destined for the trash heap of the “with it” culture. Lest we forget, the main
players in the Griswold case were
the never-to-be-trusted Planned Parenthood ideologues. Appellant Estelle
Griswold was Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of
Connecticut. She was joined by appellant C. Lee Buxton, M.D., a licensed
physician and a professor at Prior to that time, I am
told, there were condom vending machines in gas stations, and that sort of
thing; but with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the birth
control pill, coupled with the Supreme Court’s supercilious discovery of a
mythical right to privacy in matters of human sexuality, a new era emerged.
Americans became convinced that abstinence and purity were passé while
fornication and adultery were in vogue. It didn’t take long after Griswold
for all of the dominos to fall into place. By January of 1973, the Court’s
backroom goals were achieved in spades. Abortion became nothing more than a
simple “decision between a woman and her doctor.” What has happened during
the years following Roe and Doe is not only tragic, but
destructive to the fabric that holds a civilized society together. From that
push in 1965, faith in God and His laws slowly became antiquated. In place of
faith in a Supreme Being, we witnessed an escalating faith in man himself as
the god of his personal world, regardless of the costs to others who might
cross his self-centered path. Sound harsh? Perhaps these
recent news stories will put things into perspective: In In In In The escalating violence in
this country, particularly that of parents against their children, both born
and preborn, should not be overlooked, even though examining it carefully
might cause some discomfort. Perhaps the status quo really isn’t all that
humane after all. Perhaps we, as a people, are becoming barbaric. So let's begin to examine
the relationship between a declining respect for the value of the human
person and the increasing incidents of such horrific crimes. It could prove
to be useful as we strive to raise public awareness of the actual humanity of
this person whose identity has been relegated to a simple “reproductive
health” issue. To me, the bottom line is
obvious. For as surely as contraception and abortion devalue human beings, by
placing self-interest ahead of self-giving, so too does this very same
attitude spill over into other areas of life, whether we wish to admit it or
not. One example of this is the
work of the Elliot Institute. Dr. David C. Reardon studied the psychological
effects of abortion, and he noted a relationship between abortion and violent behavior later in the woman’s
life. Another example was
proffered by Jill Stanek,
who addressed the violent killings on the Virginia Tech campus in The practice of abortion —
typically (and understandably) highest in cities and counties occupied by big
state universities — argues powerfully to every participant that the taking
of a tiny human life is just fine so long as it's accomplished quietly,
antiseptically, and within the law... Some might suggest that her
correlation is a far stretch, but I would argue otherwise. The reason is
this: It is difficult to step back and objectively examine what the culture
of death and its terminology has done to the national psyche. We have been
hearing phrases such as “it’s all about me,” “it’s my right to choose” and
“reproductive rights” for such a long time that most Americans have stopped
thinking about what such terms mean, including whether or not they affect our
attitudes toward human dignity. The phrases sound good and
life goes on. But it really doesn’t; not for those children whose parents
have killed them, not for those expectant young mothers whose boyfriends or
husbands have killed them and not for those millions of preborn children who
are indeed silently, antiseptically murdered. We live in a culture that
is increasingly fixated on instant solutions for every problem. Killing is
clearly among the most popular options, though few would admit it in the vast
majority of cases — those deaths that are caused by chemical, medical or
surgical abortion. But the stain of their blood remains nonetheless. With
each death, we as a people are dehumanizing each other just a little bit
more. It seems almost surreal
that so many could be so blind to the casualties of selfishness. |
|
|
Judie Brown |
|
Amid Vatican
investigations, cardinal 'affirms' members of Leadership Conference of Women
Religious
Catholic World News
October 05, 2009
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=4227
Amid two Vatican investigations of American women religious-- an apostolic
visitation of active women’s religious communities, and a Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith investigation into the orthodoxy of the annual
conferences of Leadership Conference of Women Religious-- Cardinal Seán O’Malley of Boston has sent a “letter of affirmation”
to the members of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious on behalf of the
US bishops’ committee on clergy, consecrated life and vocations.
After praising Women & Spirit (a museum exhibit devoted to the
contributions of women religious to American life), the cardinal adds:
Allow me also, both personally and on behalf of Committee on Clergy,
Consecrated Life and Vocations, to thank you for having responded to the call
to religious life. The Church is grateful for all that your communities have
done, and continue to do, to advance the mission of the Church, especially in
the areas of health care, education, social services and pastoral ministry, as
are highlighted in the exhibit.
I share with you the recognition that recent years have been a challenging time
for religious communities. Our founders endured many challenges and obstacles
with a zeal that inspired their prayer and work. The Church needs your gifts of
perseverance, commitment and fidelity, and your unique charism,
as guided by the Holy Spirit. Please know that your ministry is greatly valued.
Together let us go forward with the work of building up the
See the following link, the title of which, speaks for itself.
|
|
Reverend
Mother Libertine - Enough With Apostates Masquerading As Catholic |
----- Forwarded
Message ----
From: AFA Action Alert <contact@afa.net>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2009 6:48:10 PM
Subject: Time for "Safe and
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
Subject: Today is
National Call Congress Day!
From: eagle@eagleforum.org
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 05:07:24 -0400
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
