Cheryl Sullenger

Complaints filed against Wichita abortion clinic owner over missing $37,000 in PAC contributions

Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

An Operation Rescue Special Report
Co-authored with Deborah Myers

Wichita, KS, July 30, 2013 (OperationRescue.org) – Operation Rescue has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), and the Kansas Bureau of Investigations (KBI) against Trust Women PAC demanding a full investigation of the political action committee that appears to be partially funding a “for-profit” abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas. The complaint lists eight classes of violations of the Federal Campaign Election Laws and Commission Regulations. It also documents possible criminal conduct.

Operation Rescue staff poured over volumes of Trust Women PAC filings and discovered that from July 2011 to present, not one report has been acceptably filed. The FEC has issued 12 separate Requests for Additional Information (RFAI) letters to Trust Women PAC in regard to errors, inconsistencies, and failure to file.

In fact, documentation shows that Trust Women’s bookkeeping is so shoddy that it has thus far resulted in FEC fines totaling $4,268, not counting steep fees imposed for collection attempts.

Over $37,000 vanishes

But perhaps most troubling is the discovery that at least $37,118 of PAC money has simply vanished without a trace. In addition, there is at least $72,000 more – a quarter of all contributions made to the Trust Women PAC since 2011 – for which there has been no proper accounting.

Operation Rescue is demanding full investigations to determine if financial crimes, such as embezzlement and/or money laundering, have occurred.

PAC money pays for abortion business expenses

Trust Women PAC is operated by Julie Burkhart, who is also the Executive Director of South Wind Women’s Center (SWWC), a new abortion clinic located in the building that was once owned by late-term abortionist George Tiller. Burkhart employs two fly-in abortionists, Cheryl Chastine of Chicago, Illinois, and Valencia Stevens of Arizona. Burkhart has used PAC funds to pay operating expenses for her abortion business. She has also used employees on the payroll of the PAC to staff her abortion clinic.

There is no record that the SWWC has ever reimbursed the Trust Women PAC even one cent of the money it spent to operate the for-profit business. One has to wonder how much Chastine and Stephens know about the Wichita abortion business’ shoddy bookkeeping.

“It looks like Burkhart might be ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul,’” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “If her abortion business was profitable, surely she would not have to dip into PAC funds to pay for abortion clinic business expenditures. This is an indication that South Wind Women’s Center is on the ropes financially with the blame falling on Burhart’s mismanagement.”

Eight Categories of Violations

The alleged violations contained in the complaint include:

1. Failure to report contributions to Federal Candidates/Committees and Other Political Committees in a proper manner
2. Failure to classify disbursements in a proper manner
3. Failure to file a single acceptable report since July 2011
4. Consistent error in calculation and reporting of cash on hand and disbursements
5. Engaging in political advocacy within the state of Kansas without registering with the state
6. Submission of reports through a non-authorized treasurer
7. Use of PAC funds and resources to operate a for-profit business (South Wind Women’s Center abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas)
8. Disbursements of funds to non-existent entities sharing the Trust Women PAC address.

“Is this gross incompetence on the part of Burkhart, or is it criminal conduct? We think it is the latter, and that’s why we are asking for a full investigation into financial malfeasance,” said Newman.

Money flows one way

Burkhart has used PAC funds to pay for items for the abortion clinic such as a washer and dryer. That expenditure was listed as a disbursement for the Primary 2012 election cycle, which ended seven months prior to the purchase.

The Trust Women PAC also paid for SWWC’s web hosting, internet marketing, and even robes for use by the abortion business. SWWC’s abortion consent forms are sent to potential customers via a Trust Women PAC e-mail address belonging to a PAC paid employee, Katie Knutter.

“Money only flows one way: from the Trust Women PAC into the coffers of South Wind Women’s Center. Profits from South Wind are pocketed by private individuals. It is all very irregular,” said Newman.

Where did the money go?

But there are literally thousands of Trust Women PAC dollars for which there is no accounting. In the Trust Women PAC filings, it is common for the beginning balance for one reporting period to be several thousand dollars less than the ending balance for the previous reporting period. In all, Operation Rescue has discovered that $37,118.13 has simply disappeared.

There are questions that must be answered. Is this a matter of incompetent accounting or unlawful activity? The shoddy FEC reports raise suspicions that South West Women’s Center could be acting as a money laundering scheme for PAC employees through which they embezzle funds, without suspicion of malfeasance.

“We have to wonder what happened to all that cash. One day the money is there and the next day it’s gone,” said Newman. “If someone is pocketing the money, it could be embezzlement, which is a serious crime. We are turning all the evidence over to the FEC, FBI, and Kansas Bureau of Investigation for further inspection to determine if laws have indeed been broken.”

Unauthorized to file

Part of the problem is that Burkhart associate Amber Lockner has attempted to file reports on behalf of Trust Women PAC, but none have been accepted since Lockner is not the treasurer of record and has no authority to file. Burkhart made attempts to file Amended Statements of Organization, but all have been rejected due to the fact that Burkhart and Lockner did not submit the statements electronically, as required. In fact, the two appear not to have mastered the electronic submission process, resulting in reports that have been repeatedly rejected by the FEC.

Shadowy political groups get funds

Documents show that Trust Women PAC spent thousands of dollars on political mailings and GOTV calls in Wichita, as well as a contribution to the Kansas Senate campaign of leftist Tim Snow. These expenditures would constitute illegal campaign activity since Trust Women PAC never registered with the State of Kansas as required by law.

However, that is not the only thing suspicious about Trust Women PAC’s illicit involvement in Kansas politics.

In the 2012 year-end report, Trust Women PAC lists a disbursement to American Action League for $2,000 for GOTV calls. The address listed as belonging to American Action League is the same as that used by Trust Women PAC. However, there is no business called “American Action League” registered with the Kansas Secretary of State. Where did the $2,000 really go?

Another disbursement entry found in the same report indicated that Trust Women PAC paid $9,750 to an entity called “Trust Women PAC (Non-Federal)” for more GOTV calls. However, no such committee exists. The Trust Women PAC is not registered as a “non-federal” entity. This represents yet another block of cash that appears to have gone to a non-existent entity for which there is no accounting.

Modus Operandi

This is a documented pattern of behavior for Burkhart. In 2006, during the hotly contested race for office of Attorney General between incumbent Republican Phill Kline and Democratic challenger Paul Morrison, Burkhart was the director of a political action committee founded and funded by late-term abortionist George Tiller called “ProKanDo.” It was no secret that ProKanDo opposed abortion clinic investigations underway in Kline’s office, especially since Tiller was a target. The election was influenced by a glut of mailings worth about $1 million attacking Kline that were put out by a “non-profit” organization called, “Kansans for Consumer Privacy Protection.” Soon after the election, which Kline lost, the “non-profit” organization closed down, ending efforts to investigate it for improper political activity.

Burkhart was listed as a co-chair for Kansans for Consumer Privacy Protection, which shared the same address as Burkhart’s ProKanDo.

The entire matter of Burkhart’s unregistered political organizations operating in the shadows of unaccountability – funded by other Burkhart groups – is completely irregular. In order to protect the integrity of elections, a thorough investigation into this shady practice must be conducted.

Who gave and who received?

Another apparent violation discovered in the volumes of FEC reports is the failure to itemize many political contributions and disbursements. This means that thousands of dollars from unknown sources are flowing in and out of the PAC to unknown pockets for unknown reasons. In the past two years, over $72,000 in receipts were non-itemized – more than half of all PAC contributions! This amount is in addition to the funds that simply went missing.

“The reason that PACs must file detailed financial reports with the FEC is to ensure that illegal contributions are not taking place and that the money is being used legitimately,” said Newman. “It appears very much like regulations are in fact being broken by Burkhart and Lockner on a routine basis.”

Competency in question

The incompetence – and perhaps criminality – reflected in the Trust Women PAC reports also raises serious questions about the competency of Burkhart to operate an abortion clinic, where women entrust their lives and health. However, given Burkhart’s PAC filings and her history of double-dealing, it is difficult to put much trust in any endeavor in which she is involved.

It has become apparent that South Wind Women’s Center is financially “under water” and must access PAC funds to stay afloat. In fact, Burkhart is delinquent $2,900 in property taxes for the clinic facility – another indication that Burkhart’s PAC and abortion clinic are suffering financial difficulties.

“If these people cannot figure out how to properly add and subtract, file a form online, or pay their bills, we question their overall competency in every other business matter,” said Newman. “The shoddy reports are a red flag alerting us that their incompetence is likely a systemic problem. If that is found to be true, women are in grave danger at South Wind Women’s Center.”

Read the letter of complaint (with links to referenced documents)
Read the 434 pages of Documentation

FREE pro-life news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Dan Guernsey

, , ,

Where’s the tolerance in San Francisco?

Dan Guernsey
By

April 20, 2015 (CardinalNewmanSociety.org) -- Proclaiming their values of tolerance, inclusion, and non-judgment, 100 “prominent” San Francisco Catholics last week took out a full-page ad in the newspaper to tell the Pope and the world that they will not tolerate or include and indeed soundly condemn the archbishop of San Francisco.

His crime? Following Canon law, which requires him to ensure that “Instruction and education in a Catholic school must be based on the principles of Catholic doctrine, and the teachers must be outstanding in true doctrine and uprightness of life” (Canon Law, 803, § 2). He is also condemned for following the teachings of the U.S. Bishops, who have consistently taught that “all members of the faculty, at least by their example, are an integral part of the process of religious education…. Teachers’ life style and character are as important as their professional credentials” (1976, Teach Them, p. 7), and the bishops’ National Directory for Catechesis which requires Catholic school leaders to “Recruit teachers who are practicing Catholics, who can understand and accept the teachings of the Catholic Church and the moral demands of the gospel, and who can contribute to the achievement of the school’s Catholic identity and apostolic goals” (2005, National Directory for Catechesis, p. 231, 233).

Archbishop Cordileone and all U.S. bishops are bound by Canon law and Church teaching to do what he is doing: ensuring that Catholic schools in his diocese are Catholic. And indeed, he is not alone in this effort. He is joined by similar significant efforts underway by bishops in the dioceses of Cincinnati, Cleveland, Santa Rosa, Honolulu and Oakland, among others.  He is just currently the biggest target in a bastion of the fully-empowered tyrannical Left who will not tolerate any deviance from their liberal orthodoxy.

The sexual dogmas of the liberal orthodoxy are so confused and so consuming that any other understanding of the nature and purpose of human sexuality and marriage, even those views held by the vast majority of humanity throughout all ages, must be condemned and ultimately silenced. To state the clear and unequivocal Catholic teaching that the only proper and moral exercise of the marital act is exclusively in the context of a committed natural marriage in the service of both love and life is viewed by some as a type of hate crime.

These “anti-bully” bullies are doing what bullies do. They are seeking to gain in their own social status and self-concept by belittling, shaming and humiliating someone outside their local social norm. As the authors admit, the social sexual norms in the Bay Area are completely supportive of sex outside of natural marriage. Those who control the culture are dead set on humiliating and eliminating anyone who would not fully support their power and the status quo.

Many other dioceses have stipulations in their employee handbooks and in their contracts related to the need to uphold Catholic teachings in word and action as terms of employment. This is nothing very new. A challenge has occurred more recently, because of the rapid deterioration of social norms related to human sexuality, and because so many Catholics and Catholic school employees are so poorly catechized regarding human sexuality and complex but critical human life issues.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

It is possible that some employees can unwittingly jeopardize their employment by running afoul of the expectations of their employment agreements. In a preemptive effort to avoid such suffering and embarrassment, a number of dioceses are striving to clarify and publicize these expectations of Catholic teachers in a spirit of truth and charity and to ensure that folks do not unwittingly join in an evangelical enterprise they cannot advance, support or—even worse—work against. Charity demands clarity and truth. Justice to one’s employees demands clarity and truth as well. Justice to ones’ employer demands that one should not work against his interests or intent. The more clearly we can all be about what we intend and believe, the better.

It is also important in a pluralistic society, where we should not all have to agree with each other on complex issues and matters of faith, that we leave room for dissent and marginalized thinking and thinkers—especially in the realm of religious thought. Our country was founded by religious dissidents whose religious views and practices did not fit in with the dominant cultures and beliefs of the powerful in their home countries. They came here seeking freedom of religion—freedom to practice their faith as they saw fit without governmental persecution. Archbishop Cordileone has sought no retribution or even disparagement against those in San Francisco who clearly disagree with the Church; he only seeks to protect his right not to hire them to do the work of the Church, a reasonable and just freedom.

While these wayward Catholics seek to drive their archbishop out of San Francisco in the name of the dominant culture, but not the Catholic faith, we must be aware that many more of us are endangered from attack as well in this rapidly declining culture. These same bullies demanding that Archbishop Cordileone lose his job as a bishop for teaching the truths of the Catholic faith will next deem it critical that Catholics lose their jobs for agreeing with him and the Church.

Reprinted with permission from The Cardinal Newman Society

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on March 7, 2014. Christopher Halloran / Shutterstock.com
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, , ,

Rubio: I’d attend a gay ‘wedding’. Walker: I have. Santorum: I wouldn’t. Cruz: Pass.

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 20, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Are you now, or were you ever, willing to attend a same-sex “wedding”? That seems to be the question lighting up the Republican presidential field, as GOP hopefuls who may one day have their finger on the nuclear button are asked the query over and over again.

So far, the Republican hopefuls' answers are yes, no, I have (sort of), and...unclear.

The media began by asking Florida's U.S. senator, Marco Rubio, if he would attend a homosexual 'wedding' ceremony, especially if he were invited by a relative or close friend.

“If there’s somebody that I love that’s in my life, I don’t necessarily have to agree with their decisions or the decisions they’ve made to continue to love them and participate in important events,” Rubio told Jorge Ramos of Fusion TV's America program.

Rubio, who became the third Republican to throw his hat in the ring last week, likened attending a same-sex “marriage” to attending the second marriage of a divorced friend. “If someone gets divorced, I’m not going to stop loving them or having them a part of our lives,” he said.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker – who has not yet formally announced his candidacy yet is considered a front-runner – said that he attended a same-sex reception, but not a ceremony. “I haven’t been to a [homosexual] 'wedding,' that’s true,” he said, “even though my position on marriage is still that’s defined between a man and a woman, and I support the Constitution of the state.”

“But for someone I love, we’ve been at a reception,” he added.

A series of candidates and potential candidates have faced similar hypotheticals.

Radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, a libertarian-leaning Republican who strongly supported Mitt Romney in previous primaries, asked two contenders “a meta-question.” Is it more important to know whether a candidate would attend a homosexual wedding or whether a president will “destroy the Islamic State before it throws hundreds of thousands of gay men to their deaths”?

Former Pennsylvania senator and 2012 presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who has said he is considering another presidential run, said it was “amazing that the Left has not risen up” against Islamic Shari'a law. “They don't focus their energy on anything except the attempt to gather more power in this country by using this issue of same-sex 'marriage' as a tool to do that.”

Then he addressed the direct question: Would he attend a gay “marriage” ceremony?

“No, I would not,” he replied curtly. When asked why not, he said, “As a person of my faith, that would be something that would be a violation of my faith. I would love them and support them, but I would not participate in that ceremony.”

Ted Cruz, the first Republican to say he will seek the GOP's presidential nomination next year, gave a more roundabout reply.

“That's part of the 'gotcha' game that the mainstream media plays, where they come after Republicans on every front, and it's designed to caricature Republicans to make them look stupid or evil or crazy or extreme,” he said. “Sadly, most media players are not actual, objective journalists. They're active partisan players.”

He called reporters “the praetorian guard protecting the Obama administration” now gearing up to campaign for Hillary Clinton.

Cruz said he had not attended a gay “marriage” ceremony but made no commitments about the future.

“Well, I will tell you, I haven’t faced that circumstance,” he said. “I have not had a loved one have a gay wedding. You know, at the end of the day, what the media tries to twist the question of marriage into is they try to twist it into a battle of emotions and personalities. So they say, 'Gosh, any conservative must hate gays.'”

The Texas senator said that he is a conservative Christian and also “a constitutionalist.”

“What we’ve seen in recent years from the Left is the federal government and unelected federal judges imposing their own policy preferences to tear down the marriage laws of the states.”

“And so if someone is running for public office, it is perfectly legitimate to ask them their views on whether they’re willing to defend the Constitution, which leaves marriage to the states, or whether they want to impose their own extreme policy views like so many on the left are doing, like Barack Obama does, like Hillary Clinton does,” he said.

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lesbian teacher Pam Strong teaches a classroom of elementary students at Ellengale Public School on Day of Pink in 2012. http://etfovoice.ca
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

,

Lesbian teacher: How I convince kids to accept gay ‘marriage’, starting at 4-years-old

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski
Image
Some of the pro-gay children's books Strong uses with her students. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Image
The chart Strong uses to show her students that same-sex partnerships are the same as male-female families. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews

TORONTO, April 20, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- A primary grade lesbian teacher from an Ontario public school revealed in a workshop at a homosexual activist conference for teachers earlier this month how she uses her classroom to convince children as young as four to accept homosexual relationships.

“And I started in Kindergarten. What a great place to start. It was where I was teaching. So, I was the most comfortable there,” Pam Strong said at the conference, attended by LifeSiteNews.

The conference, hosted by the homosexual activist organization Jer’s Vision, now called the Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity, focused on the implementation of Bill 13 in Ontario classrooms. Bill 13, called by critics the ‘homosexual bill of rights,’ passed in June 2012 and gave students the right to form pro-gay clubs in their school, including Catholic ones, using the name Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA).

Strong, who is in an open relationship with another woman and who has been a teacher for about five years, focused her workshop on what she called the “power of conversation” for promoting LGBTQ issues in an elementary classroom. She began her talk by relating how she reacted the first time one of her students called another student ‘gay’ as a putdown.

“With [the principal’s] encouragement, we decided that I would go from class to class and talk about what ‘gay’ means, what does ‘LGBTQ’ mean, what do ‘I’ mean,” she told about 40 attendees, all educators, at her workshop.

Strong related how she began with the junior kindergarten class.

“And I read a [pro-gay child’s] book [King and King], and I started to realize that conversations can be very difficult, and they can have the most power when they are the most difficult.”

“But difficult conversations are a part of what we do as teachers, right? And when these conversations are properly supported by teachers within the safety of the classroom, they provide a rich environment for our students as they unpack these complex social issues and they reflect on their own preconceptions, right, of gender, sexuality, love, all these different things,” she said.

Strong related that as she was reading “King and King” in the junior kindergarten class as a springboard to discuss her sexuality with the kids, she got to the part where the two princes become ‘married’ when one of the boys suddenly shouted out: “They can’t do that! They can’t get married. They’re two boys.”

Recounted Strong: “And I said, ‘Oh, yeah, yeah, they can. It’s right here on page 12.”

To which the boy replied, according to Strong: “Oh, yeah, I know Mrs. Strong, but that’s just a story. That’s not real life.”

“And I said: ‘It happens in real life too. I am married to a woman. I am gay. And I am in love with my wife.”

Strong said the young children “just all kind of went silent.” She then told them: “That may seem different to you, how many of you have heard of that before?”

“Not one hand went up,” she related. “And so I said: ‘That may seem different to you, but we’re not that different. Would you like to know about what I do with my family?”

“Yeah, tell us,” she recounted the children enthusiastically saying. 

“I said, you know, we take our kids to the park. I swing them on swings,” she related, telling conference attendees that she could share things she did with her own children that “mostly likely all of their families did with them.”

Then she told the children: “We laugh together. We go grocery shopping together. I read to them. I tickle them, sometimes until they scream and laugh and when they cry, I hug them until they stop.” 

Strong said that at that point, the boy who had used the word ‘gay’ looked and her and said: “Well, you’re a family.”

“And I said, yeah, we are,” she related. “And off I go to the next classroom.”

Strong said that she went from “class to class to class and continued with these conversations, and they were very powerful.”

‘It’s normal in my classroom’

Strong related an incident that happened last fall involving a new boy who had recently entered her grade 5 classroom. The new boy had not yet been made aware of Strong’s sexual preference for other women.

“All my class is very used to who I am. My family picture is very proudly in my room now. On Mondays they quite often will say, ‘What did you do with your wife?’ It’s normal in my classroom.”

Strong said that a conversation between herself and the students came up one day where it was mentioned that she was a lesbian. The new boy put his hands over his mouth and said, according to Strong: “Oh, my God, I think I’m going to puke.”

“As I took the abuse — personally, as an individual – of those words, I also saw half of my class look at me with incredible concern. One student who was right in front of me already had tears in her eyes. And I noticed several other students who were looking at him. They were just very, very upset with this kid,” she related.

Strong said the boy instantly became aware that “something he had said had just created this unbelievable tension in the room.” She related how she addressed the boy, telling him: “I think that what you might not be aware of is that I am gay, and I am married to a woman, and my family has two moms.’”

“His eyes just started darting around, and he was incredibly uncomfortable,” she related.

“I looked at the other kids and I said: ‘Ok guys, what I want to ask you is: Am I upset with him?’ And the one little girl in my class put up her hand — that doesn’t usually get into these conversations very much in my classroom — and she said, ‘Mrs Strong, I know you’re not upset with him, because he hasn’t had the benefit of our conversations.”

“And I looked at my little friend, my ‘new’ friend, and I said: ‘But, we’re going to have one now,’” she related.

Strong said that she then directed her class to the board and asked them to write everything she had told them related to LGBTQ.

“And my class all of a sudden popped up. ‘LGBTQ’ was on the board, ‘lesbian,’ and all the different words coming out there. And I sat back and said, ‘Let’s review.’ So, the last year and a half of ‘inclusive’ education came alive in my classroom.”

Strong told her workshop attendees that her “new little friend” is now a devoted champion of diversity. She boasted how he was the one in her class to count down the days to the pro-homosexual Day of Pink that took place earlier this month. When Strong took a photo of all the children wearing pink shirts in her classroom, she said the boy requested to be in the front.

“For me, that is the power of conversations. That’s the power of sharing our stories,” she said.

LGBTQ classroom ‘conversation starters’

Strong called it “key” to develop a “positive classroom culture” — and she mentioned it often takes months — before getting into what she called “difficult conversations” with students about convincing students of the normality of her sexual preference for women.

She mentioned how she spends time “building a common vocabulary” in her classroom of words like “stereotype, prejudice, discrimination” so her students will be able to more readily conform to her pro-LGBTQ message.

“Sometimes with these big ideas there are also very big words that are very hard to understand. I find that whether it’s kindergarten, right up to grade six, visuals help a lot,” she said.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

The lesbian teacher has amassed a collection of “conversation starters” that she says helps get her started when presenting to her students the LGBTQ message. She said pro-gay children’s books are one of her favorites.

“I use current events, news articles, advertisement are great for gender, especially with Kindergarten kids, pink and girl toys and all the rest of it. Commercials are great, I use one right now, the Honey Maid commercial.” The 2014 “Dad & Papa" commercial depicts two male same-sex partners engaging with their children in normal family activities such as making s’mores, eating dinner around the table, and walking in the park.

Strong says she watches the commercial with her students up to three times, asking them to make a list of all the similarities between the gay-partnership and their own families.

“Of course they think it’s going to be so different, [that] this family is going to be so different,” she said.

Strong said the kids notice dozens of similarities, but usually only one difference, namely that the commercial has “two dads.” Other than this, she said the students “could not find one thing in that commercial that was different than their own families.” In this way she convinces the kids that a gay-partnership is identical to a family made up of a male and female. Strong called it a “fantastic lesson for kids of all ages.”

“There was nothing left for me to teach at the end of it. It was a huge learning for some kids,” she said.

‘Recruiting children? You bet we are’

Though homosexual activists their efforts in the schools as a way of combatting bullying, a number of homosexual activists have highlighted that the movement’s goal is in fact to “indoctrinate” children into accepting the normalcy of the homosexual lifestyle.

“I am here to tell you: All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie,” wrote Canadian gay activist Sason Bear Bergman, a woman who identifies as a transgender man, in a March 2015 piece titled “I Have Come to Indoctrinate Your Children Into My LGBTQ Agenda (And I'm Not a Bit Sorry).” Bergman holds nothing back, stating she wants to make children “like us” even if that “goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion.”

In 2011 U.S. gay activist Daniel Villarreal penned a column for Queerty.com stating that the time had come for the homosexual lobby to admit to “indoctrinating” schoolchildren to accept homosexuality.

“Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?”

“We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it. Recruiting children? You bet we are,” he added.

Homosexual activist Michael Swift wrote in 1987 in the Gay Community News that school children would become explicit targets for homosexual indoctrination. “We shall seduce them in your schools…They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us,” he wrote at the time. 

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook