A freedom of speech debate has erupted at Carleton University over a student council proposal that would effectively shut down a campus group opposed to abortion. The controversial recommendation would deny student association funding and other types of support for campus activities linked to “anti-choice purposes.” It would also assert the association’s position to “respect and affirm a woman’s right to choose.”
…“I think this is a dangerous and unproductive motion,” said petition organizer Garnett Genuis, who has so far enlisted the support of 150 students. “They’re bringing this forward in the name of being pro-choice. Yet in the grand scheme of things, they’re anti-choice. They’re against people having the choice to express opinions, the choice to hear alternate perspectives. This is the grand irony.” The Catholic Civil Rights League has denounced the proposal, which has started circulating on blogs that are conservative and call themselves “pro-life.”
Shawn Menard, president of Carleton’s students association, defended the proposed changes, saying they will be debated and likely amended to protect free speech before being put to a vote next week. (Source)
If anyone was duped into thinking that we could have a free society without a firm foundation in Judeo-Christian ethics, the Carleton Student’s University Association is proving this idea to be fictious. By their own standards of “freedom of speech” and “tolerance”, everyone is starting to realize that the left is not interested in those concepts when they are applied universallyand liberally. They only apply, apparently, to those who agree with them. Free speech and tolerance? Sure thing. Just make sure that you stay within the boundaries that they set. But you have to wonder whether, in a rare moment of intelligent retrospection, they realize that under that standard, heck, Joseph Stalin would be considered a great democrat. As long as his peons smiled and laughed when he did, everything was just fine. If they didn’t, they would find themselves in a nice, cold cell somewhere in Siberia which is, in effect, what CUSA is relegating people to who don’t submit to their groupthink on moral issues.
The Universities of Canada, with Carleton blazing a path of leftisty thuggery and self righteousness, are showing themselves to be unconcerned with debating issues of relevance to the wider culture. Instead they cower to the demands of unbalanced feminists to suppress legitimate discussion. Does it not occur to them that once this principle of suppressing a legitimate debate happens once, it can happen again and again and again…involving many other issues. What’s next? Are Christian groups going to be targetted? Are self-professed Christians to be allowed to attend the University in the future? What about other religions? What about other causes that don’t fit the politically correct shoes of the champagne liberals at Carleton University?
As for the so-called “pro-choice” groups who initiated this whole disgrace, it is a clear sign of their own cowardice in not being able to defend their position. This whole broohaha was precipitated by a women’s group who became nervous that 200 students would actually want to hear the other side of the abortion debate. Ya know, something different from what the establishment rams down their throat 24 hours a day. Being cowards and thugs, they appealed to CUSA to clamp down on this dangerous freedom of speech idea. This shows that the pro-abortion side is desperate to hold on to their bankrupt morality being forced down the throats of Canadians and university students in particular. They know that as science reveals more and more about the humanity of the unborn, they don’t stand a chance when the cat is let out of the proverbial bag.
In a democracy, we believe that the truth of a proposition will eventually win over the hearts and minds of its citizens. Therefore if a culture is in error on a particular issue, democracy provides the means to effect change. On the other hand, totalitarianism, like the one being advanced by CUSA and Carleton University by extension, stops that change from ever taking place and therefore threatens the civilization itself because it cannot adjust to something which would otherwise be acknowledged to be objectively harmful to the person and to the culture. This is the reason why totalitarian regimes and cultures fall. They do not permit voices of reason to impact the culture and therefore correct their erroneous thinking. If CUSA is right about abortion, then it has nothing to fear. If it is wrong about abortion, it has everything to fear, including the very reason we have a university system.
The great irony in this whole sad episode is that universities, at least in modern times, have always been at the forefront of advancing freedom of speech and tolerance ideals. Carleton University, should this motion pass CUSA and not be revoked by the Administration, will officially be more repressive and intolerant than Canadian society at large. This ominous trend will eventually seep into Canada’s politics and start to relegate people of faith and life to second class citizens – not being able to hold office or participate in national debates on issues that mean something to them. And should the issue of abortion or other moral issues be the REASON why Canada is facing a serious moral, demographic, and cultural decline, the country will have cut off the only way to access a remedy for its ills: a healthy and respectful dialogue on the very issues which threaten Canada’s social and cultural institutions.
Carelton University and the other Universities who sanction such rank hypocrisy are precipitating the Canadian decline into full fledged moral dicatatorship. Democratic deficit at Carleton U? Oh please. That’s so yesterday!
Bringing the state back into the bedrooms of the nation
Is freedom as important as equality?By Kate Fraher, Researcher, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
Canadians are well versed in the main argument in favour of redefining marriage, namely that broadening marriage to include same-sex couples grants equality, while taking nothing away from heterosexuals.
A compelling argument, not to be dismissed. But not discussed in the public square are the equally compelling arguments of Canada’s academics who oppose the redefinition of marriage.
Canadian professors premise their opposition to redefining marriage in three basic ways: There are those who believe redefining marriage eliminates biology as the basis for parenthood , those who believe any redefinition of marriage violates the right of children to know and be raised by their biological mother and father and finally, those more concerned with political freedom; once biology is eliminated as the basis for parenthood within marriage, the state begins to encroach on the rights of individuals.
[Cere] points to recent studies that have discovered inherent differences between the male and female brain, as well as studies that highlight the unique bond that exists between biological mothers and their infants, also known as maternal attachment . These findings, he says, disprove claims that gender and sex are mere social construction and somehow culturally malleable . Marriage is meant to address sexual difference by sustaining complex forms of social interdependency between men and women-not an easy task-and to ensure rights of children to their parents .
Cere and Canadian-born political scholar Dr. Seana Sugrue both agree that the redefinition of marriage by the state is a threat to political liberalism. They both cite John Locke, the father of political liberalism, who “recognized that the market and conjugal society require a measure of autonomy from overly zealous state regulation to function effectively” . Sugrue and Cere agree that marriage, like the market, is a pre-political institution which operates on self-generated norms. When the state tries to dictate these norms, the normative structure of the institution collapses and political freedom is lost .
It really does boggle the mind to know that the Canadian public could be so duped on the question of same-sex “marriage”. To believe that the redefinition of such a foundational institution as marriage would not have irreparable and destructive consequences on our society is incredibly short-sighted.
As parts of the excerpt of the article point out, children are the first victims of this new sexual utopia, followed shortly by a loss of freedom. The remarkable thing about it is that the secular liberal establishment would rather kiss away the freedoms they created for themselves over the past forty years rather than to fight for the legitimate exercise of the same.
Socon BlogBurst Contribution on the CPC Refusal to Permit Candidates to Answer Abortion Questionnaire
To read more entries on this Blog Burst, click the index page here. LONDON, ON, November 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – LifeSiteNews.com has learned that the Conservative Party of Canada is once again enforcing a policy barring its candidates from responding to questionnaires that would allow voters to cast an informed vote on issues of importance to them. The party policy is especially targeted at the controversial abortion issue. Despite denials by Conservative Party officials, the policy was in place during the last federal election in January and LifeSiteNews.com obtained a memo from party headquarters forbidding candidates to answer a pro-life questionnaire.
One of the issues that the Conservative Party ran on was to develop greater electoral transparency and accountability. So far, Harper’s government has done a good job, not only on meeting this objective but also implementing many other pro-family measures and policies. However, one of the disturbing points in his term has been his almost neurotic and paranoid fear of the abortion question. It is neurotic and paranoid because it does not reflect the reality of where Canadians stand on this issue. According to a recent Environics poll on the question, two thirds of Canadians want some restriction on abortion. Moreover, it cannot be argued that Stephen Harper is overly cautious on political issues, lest he overturn the proverbial political apple cart and lose the next election. He has shown that he can grow some blue testicals when the opportunity avails itself. Case in point: Canada’s controversial recent support for Israel in their conflict with the Palestinians. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, of course, but it is still nonetheless politically risky.
Given these two factors, social conservatives across the country are starting to wonder just what kind of deal Mr. Harper made with the devil to shut out the democratic process on the issue of abortion. Public sentiment is not the issue. The poll demonstrates that quite easily. In fact, that two thirds number has held for years now. Nor is his tolerance for pushing through on unpopular issues. Remember the Income Trust Tax changes? It’s not like he really cares about cozzying to seniors. This shows he is an idealogue on some issues. Good for him. Now it’s time for it to be good for us.
So what’s really going on here, Stephen? Something just doesn’t add up.
As my good friend, Suzanne, has written:
Barring candidates from answering questionnaires does nothing to develop greater electoral transparency and accountability. Candidates who have nothing to hide, hide nothing. People have the right to know what their candidates think on issue important to them, and candidates should be free to formalize their thoughts in written form so that their thoughts can be faithfully reproduced.
Now the conventional wisdom of Tory party drones is that they cannot bring up abortion because it would make the media even more hostile to the CPC than they normally are.
Then would one of these drones please explain to us why Mr. Harper has inaugurated the war with the Parliamentary press gallery? It doesn’t seem to me that Mr. Harper is concerned with media backlash when it concerns his own pet policies, but for some inexplicable reason, he turns from blue to yellow when it comes to standing up for basic free speech on the question of abortion.
Stephen, you’ve done a good job up until now. Don’t take us for granted. Let the democratic process play out in the Party and in the country at large. You’re a smart guy. If you can maneuver well on other complex political issues, you can do it for us on this one. We expect it. If not, look yonder south to the Republican Party, and what happened to them. It can happen here.
Remember the picture above, Stephen. Remember what cowardice you are displaying, Mr. Harper. Remember the Judgement. What the least you did for the least of my brethren, you did to me. Don’t forget it, Mr. Harper. We won’t.
To sound off, contact the Conservative Party here, and let them know that you are not very happy with their approach to this whole question.
Wal-Mart: No More Corporate Contributions to Support Or Oppose Controversial Issues
By Peter J. Smith
BENTONVILLE, Arkansas, November 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Retail giant Wal-Mart announced Tuesday afternoon that the company will no longer use corporate money to “support or oppose highly controversial issues” such as homosexual activism. Wal-Mart had outraged pro-family groups for its financial support to homosexual activists, and for the recent promotion for sale of a graphic sex-ed manual promoting teen lesbianism, recalled shortly after a LifeSiteNews.com exposé.
“Wal-Mart will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers” the announcement stated, adding that Wal-Mart intends to adhere to the words of its founder Sam Walton: “Each Wal-Mart store should reflect the values of its customers and support the vision they hold for their community.”
The American Family Association sent out an Action Alert saying it was “pleased with this announcement” and asked its supporters to “send Wal-Mart a ‘Thank You’ for its statement.”
Previously the AFA encouraged its members to boycott Wal-Mart for the lucrative shopping days following Thanksgiving on account of Wal-Mart’s increasing involvement with activist homosexual organizations, such as joining the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and a recent $60,000 donation to the activist group Out & Equal.
“We believe that Wal-Mart will remain neutral in cultural battles,” the AFA declared, stating that in response to Wal-Mart it has decided to “cancel its efforts of encouraging people to not shop at Wal-Mart or Sam’s Club this Friday and Saturday.”
See Buckwheat? Things can change if we Christians actually start to think they can and move in an organized and deliberate fashion. Victory, however, is only possible when you STOP busying yourself with stupid things in life and start working for the culture of life and getting serious about stopping evil.
Just to give you all the heads up, Katy McIntyre, the CUSA VP of Student Services has proposed an amendment to the CUSA Constitution. The proposed amendment seeks to change CUSA’s position from one of neutrality, by declaring themselves a pro-choice governing body. The amendment will prevent any groups who are not pro-choice from obtaining club status and funding. The move is directly targeted at Carleton Lifeline, but if the proposed amendment is passed, it will also affect many Christian, Jewish, and Muslim groups on campus. McIntrye says CUSA will screen clubs to ensure that they are not”anti-choice”. The proposal was discussed this evening at the CUSA Council meeting. Nicholas and I were both present and able to ask a few questions. The motion to amend will be put forward at the council’s next meeting in earlyDecember. We will keep you up to date with developments, but in the meantime any words of wisdom, advice or prayers would be greatly appreciated.
- Sarah FletcherPresident of Carleton Lifeline
Why not just ban all religions next? I mean, isn’t that what they are after anyhow? All religions of course except the religion of Moloch and the most holy sacrament of abortion. And all the Molochites say “Amen”.
Hey everyone, I wish I could send this email under better circumstances. Carleton University students Association has just put in a motion BANNING any group who is pro-life from campus. I just came back from the meeting in which this motion was tabled. They are sayign that we are against the Canadian constitution and are saying we violate safe space rules. So i guess everyone can have a safe space UNLESS you are pro-life. Well I guess the fight is on. This motion will be debated and voted on at the meeting next month. After our last crushing defeat at not getting status this shows their view to SURPRESS any view that does not agree with them. What I am emailing you about is this….Carleton Lifeline needs HELP!!! This is big as it is the only university who will espuse this view if it passes. We need all teh help we can get. We need a lawyer, support, lobbying not only the CUSA executive but the school administration aswell. We need to make it clear we will not go down easily and I am prepared to even no recognize the motion if it passes and continue on. Sarah Fletcher and I are ready for this fight. Any ideas, help, plans or contacts that you can give me to help woudl be so very much appreciated. This may set a precident for the rest of the provinces corrupt student unions to try the same thing to oppress teh views of pro-life students on campus. We all need your help!
- Thanks, Nicholas McLeod Treasurer, Carleton Lifeline
This is all very predictable. When the left has no way of winning the argument, they simply resort to what they do best: stifling and muzzling dissent. We have seen it on the gay marriage front and we have seen it in many different ways on the abortion front.
Isn’t it telling that they would resort to this kind of thing? Let’s face it, if your position is the valid and correct one, why would you resort to this sort of thuggery, unless of course you feared that the truth of what an abortion is would eventually get out and the worship of Moloch would end.
Back in 2004, I warned about this in my speech to those assembled on Parliament Hill who were opposing Bill C-250, the so-called “hate crime” bill against gays:
My fellow Canadians, although these words are inscribed on the American Declaration of Independence, no truer or more timely message can be spoken of on Canadian soil. For there is now before us a rise of a veiled totalitarianism which is creeping into our beloved country, seeking to muzzle dissent and debate on vital issues to the prosperity and even survival of this great country.
Mother of two Karen Gallimore was searching for Christmas gifts for her two daughters, Laura 10, and Sarah, 11, when she came across the ‘toy’ Tesco has been forced to remove a pole-dancing kit from the toys and games section of its website after it was accused of “destroying children’s innocence”. The Tesco Direct site advertises the kit with the words, “Unleash the sex kitten inside…simply extend the Peekaboo pole inside the tube, slip on the sexy tunes and away you go! “Soon you’ll be flaunting it to the world and earning a fortune in Peekaboo Dance Dollars”. The £49.97 kit comprises a chrome pole extendible to 8ft 6ins, a ‘sexy dance garter’ and a DVD demonstrating suggestive dance moves. The kit, condemned as ‘extremely dangerous’ by family campaigners yesterday, was discovered by mother of two Karen Gallimore who was searching for Christmas gifts for her two daughters, Laura 10, and Sarah, 11. Mrs Gallimore, 33, of Ellesmere Port, Cheshire, said yesterday: “I’m no prude, but any children can go on there and see it. It’s just not on.” Dr Adrian Rogers, of family campaigning group Family Focus said yesterday that the kit would “destroy children’s lives”. He said: “Tesco is Britain’s number one chain, this is extremely dangerous. It is an open invitation to turn the youngest children on to sexual behaviour. “This will be sold to four, five and six-year olds. This is a most dangerous toy that will contribute towards destroying children’s innocence.”
Just got this in from my colleague, Joseph C. Ben-Ami, the Executive Director for Institute for Canadian Values. The Institute of Canadian Values first broke this story and has done a great job in shining the light on this national scandal. I encourage people to financially support them in their necessary and valiant struggle to save our culture.
Here is the text of Joseph’s email:
The book being sold and carried in libraries is a second edition, so there are some changes that have been made. For instance, the line about God being a “dyke” has been removed, as has the reference to 80 percent of the population being bi-sexual. The chapter headed “My First Time F***ing a Girl” has been changed to “My First Time S**ing a Girl”.That being said, there are many other issues that common sense people need to know about the second edition that make it a dangerous book for teenage girls. Here are some examples:
1. The section entitled “Relationship Fundamentals” teaches nothing about relationships, dealing exclusively with sexual activity. Here’s what the book says about the first item, “Mutual Respect”:
“Sally is really in the mood and is ready to hit the sack with Alice, but Alice doesn’t really feel like it. Alice feels comfortable telling Sally, “Not tonight, babe” and Sally respects Alice’s boundaries and decisions.” Note that Alice and Sally are two girls.
The second item under the heading “Relationship fundamentals” is “Equality”. Here’s how the guide explains (notes in parentheses are added):
“Julie gives Pat a b*** j**, and after he c**** he goes down (performs oral sex) on Julie. They believe that they should have equality and reciprocity in their relationship… especially in the bedroom!”
Remember that this is being taught to 13 year old girls.2. Here’s an example of a healthy relationship – written by a 17 year old:
“The first time I had sex was an amazing experience. My boyfriend and I had talked a couple of times about having sex. We both seemed eager, but we both agreed to wait until the time came, whenever it felt right for both of us.”
“In our first week dating he told me one night that he loved be. I was surprised, but I loved him too and I told him. We spent lots of time together in the next couple of weeks. We fell completely in love with each other. Then, after spending the day with him and a couple of friends, he and
I were lying on my bed kissing. I kept thinking this was the right time and before I could say anything, he said that he loved me and asked if we could have sex.”
“I was completely into it – I was relaxed, we were using a condom, and I knew the person I was with was the right person”
“Afterwards, we held each other and I felt so good about it and it hadn’t even hurt.”
“My boyfriend and I continued to have a meaningful and very fun sex life for the next five months.”
“Even though we broke up and we never speak or even look at each other anymore, and I’ve had sex with different people since him, I’m glad he was my first. I don’t regret it and I’ll always remember it.”
3. The first item in the questionnaire entitled “Are You ready to Have Sex” is: “Do you have a partner to have sex with?” The second item…”Do you love yourself?”
Once again, remember that this is for girls as young as 13 years!
4. Here’s how the guide answers the question “Do you need to be in love?” to have sex:“No. Lots of people have sex when they aren’t in love.There’s nothing wrong with sexual expression; it’s part of who you are. The important thing about sex is that it should never be forced and should always be respectful.”Is it bad to sleep with lots of people? Here’s what the guide says to 13 year old girls:
“Once again, ask yourself if it’s respectful sex. Is the person protecting herself against STIs (Sexually Transmitted Disease) and pregnancy.”
What does the rest of this chapter deal with? In addition to the above, here are the rest of the headings:
“What is good sex?”
“What is a Blow Job?”
“How do you have oral sex with a girl?”
“What are guys’ areas of pleasure?” “If you swallow c*m, will it do anything to you?” “Does anal sex hurt more than vaginal sex?” “Are there different types of orgasms?”
“Does your ability to have an orgasm depend on your emotional mood?” 5. There’s a chapter entitled “Once a Boy – Now a Girl” which describes the process, including costs, whereby a personal can undergo a sex change. As the guide says:“Imagine not being able to be yourself and having to constantly deny how you feel, what you believe, and who you are; these are some of the issues that young transgendered people struggle with from day to
6. Here’s a good one on abortion. A girl is telling about the counseling she received from a public health nurse:: “…it wasn’t a baby (the nurse explained to her) but an embryo and that at this point it was just a mass of tissue…” Later in the same section, the guide refers to an aborted fetus as “abortion tissue”.I hope this helps. I will try to have these and other pages up on the website in pdf as soon as possible.
I would like to say that I am looking forward to it, Joseph, but I can’t bring myself to say that.
As previously mentioned in the previous post, St. Stephen’s Community House has taken down its webpage, promoting The Little Black Book. We do not know why this is as all government funded agencies should operate on a transparent basis. If you take taxpayers’ money, you are subject to taxpayer scrutiny. That’s how it works, friends.
So, anyhow, if you try and access the original URL:
Now, of course we know that they once carried it because we see them offering the ORIGINAL EGGREGARIOUS VERSION in their gift section just in time for the 2004 Christmas Season. You can find it by just scrolling down to item number 3 under “Holiday Gift Ideas that Show You Care”. Indeed. I can just see lots of parents stuffing their kids stockings on Christmas Eve with this gift: “Here, honey, have the gift that will destroy your innocence and dignity. Be a slave to sex for the rest of your life. You’ll thank me for it one day. I love you sweetheart. Merry Moloch to you, dear.”
By the way, I know that the original version was still kicking around as late as April 28 (or 24), 2005 because web.archive.org shows this date on their results page and they also build the date into the resulting URL:
By clicking on the various menu items, you can see for yourself that this version was still being pushed around the country.
This is one of my favourite selections that I pulled from the webarchive….
St. Stephen’s Community House is a community-based social service agency in Toronto that assists more than 23,000 people each year. Its self published edition on which this book is based has been used by educators and social workers across North America.
Did you catch that? So even before St. Stephen’s cleaned up (at least somewhat) the “work”, its self published edition (likely the original version) was already being used by educators and social workers across North America.
In the course of my investigation tonight, I have discovered that The Little Black Book has gone through many revisions. The most recent version of this “work” dated September 2006 appears to have edited out some of the the more sexually explicit, graphic, and egregiously offensive material originally included BUT NOT BY MUCH. For instance, perusing through the table of contents, the “Sexual Identities” section appears to have been removed but the story is included elsewhere. The substance of at least one of the stories, for instance, is the same with a slight change in the title. i.e. Instead of “My first time F_CKING a girl”, it’s “My first time SEXING a girl.”
But one has to ask the basic and obvious question: if St. Stephen’s Community House did nothing wrong and the work in question is so beneficial to our children’s health, why did they remove the book from their website? Aren’t they proud of their work? This was a publicly funded project from government money. We, as taxpayers, want to see just where our tax dollars are going. I mean, let’s face it, it’s not like the WHOLE WORLD doesn’t know what’s going on here, guys. Have you not heard of ‘Google’? Amazon, Chapters Indigo and, until recently, Walmart are all carrying it. And they list you as the funders.
To read some of the less smutty selections of the revised book, click here. As the authors explain…
…it took 2 years of revisions of constant revisions (gee I wonder why?) with a number of youth and community professionals (like Debbie ‘L. Do-ya, no doubt), including social workers and doctors (I guess even the original version was too perverse for our already sex-saturated culture), to edit and review it…and here we are today (ah…but where will you be in 6 months time?)….Reading about all these issues may bring up questions that are not answered in The Little Black Book (wink wink, I bet you have another racier version for us right…in colour fa sure!) so please check out the websites and hotlines (does it start with 900?) listed if you require additional information. We hope you enjoy the book.
Bridget Sinclair, Project Co-ordinator and Facilitator
Marlon Merraro, Manager, Youth Services
St. Stephen’s Community House
Just thought that our viewing audience would like to know who the publishers of the SMUT are…
The official publisher of The Little Black book is Annick Press. They feature the book on this page. You know, this reminds me of that scene from the movie, My Cousin Vinny. Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei are bickering back and forth about their predicament of being stuck in an out-of-the-way Southern town. There’s one point in the scene, after Pesci brags about being able get along with anyone despite being having a heavy Bronx accent and wearing attire customary of the Bronx, Marisa turns to Pesci and says sarcastically, “Oh yeah, you blend.“
It’s kinda like Annick Press’s home page featuring bona fide kids’ books (or at least it looks like it) on the one hand and then publishing The Little Black Book on the other. It all just blends together. It’s just a matter of perspective, that’s all. Really. Just trust me.
While Annick is the general publisher, FireFly Books hold the Canadian and U.S. Rights. Here is their page advertising the book.
Some other fine, wholesome products fromWALMART…..
UPDATED! Wal-Mart Sells Gay Sex Manuals! 11/17/2006
It seems that Wal-Mart is now into the promotion of teen lesbian sex. That’s right, available on-line is a book that Wal-Mart sells entitled “The Little Black Book for Girlz: A Book on Healthy Sexuality”. This filthy publication instructs (in a Planned Parenthood sort of way – perverted and obsene) young girls how to engage in homosexual acts with one another. Scroll down to read a very informative article reagarding this very peverted manual.
We looked up this book at walmart.com to see if it was available for sale, and yes it was, as were a host of other perverted homosexual publications. It seems that the once family-friendly Wal-Mart is not so “friendly” anymore toward the biblical God-ordained family. What a reproach!
Not only is Wal-Mart selling lesbian sex manuals geared toward teenage girls, but upon further investigation, we have found that they are also selling the books “The Joy of Gay Sex”, and “The Ins and Outs of Gay Sex,” manuals on homosexual sodomy. (Source)
Wal-Mart is refusing to explain why a sexually explicit manual on how to be a lesbian was pulled suddenly from its website just hours after a WND story about the product appeared.
Family organizations in Canada had warned about the book just weeks ago, and while it calls God a “fat black dyke” and provides how-to information for same-sex experimentation, the store described it as the “stuff youth need to know.”
It’s called “The Little Black Book for Girlz: A Book on Healthy Sexuality” and is produced by St. Stephens’ Community House in Toronto, an organization that has fled its Christian foundation.
The book was posted on the site through late yesterday and early today, but suddenly disappeared. WND asked Wal-Mart to explain what had happened to the book listing and why the change was made, and the company provided only a generic response that didn’t answer any questions… (Source)
Canada Free Press
The co-author of a book, which calls God a “fat black dyke—financed by all three levels of the Canadian government—was the 2004 recipient of a Governor General award.
Chi Nguyen, of Ottawa, co-authored St. Stephen’s Community House’s The Little Black Book: A Guide to Sexual Health for Grrrls by Grrils.
Five years later, under a slightly revised title, The Little Black Book for Girlz: A Book on Healthy Sexuality was posted online at the beginning of the 2006 school year….(Source)
Well, now that the dust has settled a bit, a few remarks about the whole Walmart-Little Black Book Shakedown.
Firstly, all it took was the wife of a nobody blogger to start the ball rolling on getting the biggest retailer in the world to bend its business practice of selling smut. That might not be big news to the Main Stream Media, but it sure is big news to us in the culture wars. And all it took was one simple blog entry to start the revolution. So what is the moral of the story? Get yourself a blog and roll with it!
Secondly, when you smell a rat or think you do, don’t underestimate the significance of your find. Instead, be sure to save the relevant webpage on your harddrive. Your target is going to be pulling that page off the web really quickly if you hit the bulls eye. Ergo, you want a copy of it so the world can see what they were promoting. I didn’t to that with Walmart but I did it with the Ottawa Public Library. Still, I still did manage to find the cached version of their webpage here.
Thirdly, we need to keep up the pressure on Walmart. If The Little Black Book is any indication of what we can expect from their partnership with the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (see below), it is not going to change our boycott one iota. In fact, it’s only going to heighten it….
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 /U.S. Newswire/ — The National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC) announced today a partnership with Wal-Mart Stores Inc. as part of the company’s ongoing commitment to advancing diversity among all of its associate, supplier and customer bases. This partnership will include executive representation on the NGLCC’s Corporate Advisory Council (CAC) and sponsorship of the organization’s 2006 events and initiatives.As part of Wal-Mart’s involvement with NGLCC, Dee Breazeale, vice president of divisional merchandise, SAM’S CLUB Jewelry, will serve on the organization’s Corporate Advisory Council (CAC). The CAC is composed of NGLCC corporate partners whose mission is to discuss issues upon which members of the NGLCC and CAC work together to educate Corporate America and the public on the economic benefits of providing a diverse workplace and creating mutually beneficial relationships with the LGBT and LGBT-friendly business community.
In addition, Wal-Mart will assist the NGLCC in developing, expanding and promoting corporate diversity business development and procurement opportunities by sponsoring some of its programs including two of the organization’s conferences. Last month, NGLCC recognized the company as the newest corporate member of the chamber at the NGLCC’s International Business and Leadership Conference in Montreal.
“We are honored to have Wal-Mart’s support of the NGLCC. Our partnership will not only provide more opportunities for the NGLCC, but the business community as a whole,” said NGLCC Co- Founder and President Justin Nelson. “We are pleased with this addition to our organization and to our council.”
Wal-Mart joins a highly respected group of companies with representatives on the CAC, including IBM, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, American Airlines, Intel Corporation, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Lehman Brothers, Travelport, Merrill Lynch, American Express, Cisco Systems, Avis, Orbitz, Intuit, Kodak, Fannie Mae, Millennium Hotels and Resorts and Kimpton. (Source)
So I am calling again for the pressure to be increased. DO NOT SHOP AT WALMART THIS CHRISTMAS. Yes, I know there are other business that are equally culpable on this issue and similar issues (like abortion). However, it is important to FOCUS on one major business per industry sector. When they bend, ONLY THEN is it time to move on to the next guy, but not before. Focus is absolutely critical. We must keep our eye on the prize and that prize right now is Walmart.
By the way, if you want to read some of the other exerpts from The Little Black Book, check out this page.