Ben Johnson

,

Pro-family leader “SLAPPed” with $1 million nuisance lawsuit from registered sex offender

Ben Johnson
Ben Johnson

BOSTON, July 12, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – A homosexual activist and registered sex offender has slapped a pro-family organization in Massachusetts with a $1 million lawsuit – and is pursuing criminal charges against its president – for posting a letter the activist sent to various media and reportedly encouraged them to publicize.

Adam Flanders had previously secured a restraining order against MassResistance President Brian Camenker, although Camenker says he has “never had any contact with the man” nor ever visited Flanders’ home city of Belfast, Maine.

In a new lawsuit filed on June 29 against MassResistance as a whole as well as Camenker personally, the 25-year-old is seeking $500,000 for “emotional distress and suffering, as well as past and future damage” to his career, and another $500,000 “to further discourage hate crimes and other forms of harassment and stalking motivated by prejudice against gay and lesbian citizens.” Flanders claims the alleged harassment constitutes a “serious assault on a protected class and a minority based on Plaintiff’s sexual orientation.”

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

Flanders says a legal complaint is necessary, because “bigoted and discriminatory individuals” subject innocent LGBT activists to “cyber-bullying” and “stalking.”

Flanders also says he has already made “criminal complaints to police,” and claims that the Belfast Chief of Police actually encouraged him to file the suit against Camenker, writing

Belfast PD and the District Attorney are currently investigating the case to see if the Defendant Brian Camenker has violated the Protection from Harassment Order and/or committed new crimes pursuant to Maine Statute. The Belfast Chief of Police recommended that the Plaintiff sue Brian Camenker and MassResistance for defamation, while they attempt to find some way to criminally charge Brian Camenker.

“This is a complete abuse of process, just like the restraining order,” Brian Camenker of MassResistance told LifeSiteNews.com. 

Camenker said that in January 2007, Flanders distributed a letter to local media exposing the activities of the Rockland, Maine-based homosexual organization known as OUT! ... As I Want to Be. The letter stated adult members of the organization were often intoxicated, propositioned or fondled minors, and turned a blind eye to pedophilia in the organization’s ranks. 

Flanders was charged with the sexual abuse of a minor in August, 2006 and is registered as a sex offender in the state of Maine. According to his profile on the sex offender registry, his victim was 14 or 15 years old at the time.

Flanders’ signed affidavit claims that Belfast Chief of Police Michael McFadden told him that conviction is “very minor,” and the “equivalent to stealing a candy bar.”

Sometime after that incident, Camenker said Flanders had a change of heart and demanded all media outlets remove his letter. Living up to its name, MassResistance refused. Flanders then contacted the company that hosted MassResistance’s website, the Kentucky-based HostExcellence.

“Flanders listed the company owner’s full name, his home address, and his business address,” giving him 24 hours to remove the site, MassResistance wrote in a statement e-mailed to LifeSiteNews.com. Flanders then “threatened that he would begin various immediate legal actions against the owner personally, saying he was ‘personally culpable’ and would be seeking ‘personal damages’ from him.”

HostExcellence complied. MassResistance’s website went down for a few days without notice and is now hosted by another company.

Flanders now calls his authorship of the letter into question, saying it was “allegedly written by” him and that MassResistance “failed to verify the authenticity of the letter.” However, Flanders’ signatures on the legal complaint and the 2007 letter appear to be identical.

WND.com posted two articles last month about the Flanders imbroglio. Both had been taken down within two days. Now Camenker faces civil and perhaps criminal charges.

“If this one guy is able to pull this off and silence me, that’s going to become the norm all across the country,” Camenker told LifeSiteNews. “All of the gay blogs are watching this. We’ve got to find a lawyer, and we’ve got to stop this thing.”

The tactics used against MassResistance parallel a broader strategy on the Left known as SWATing, in which radical activists call phony reports in to local police stations in an effort to have the blogger’s home raided by the SWAT team. 

Last January, a left-wing activist called police posing as Patrick Frey, the proprietor of Patterico’s Pontifications, a right-leaning legal blog. “I just shot her, my wife,” he said. Police responded in the middle of the night and handcuffed Frey until they discovered his wife was safe and very much alive.

Sheriff’s deputies pulled up to the home of Erick Erickson of RedState.com in May, saying they had gotten a report of an accidental shooting in his home.” Erickson, who had received threats in the days before the false report, warned his local police to be on the lookout for such a call.

Pastor Scott Lively faced a lawsuit accusing him of “crimes against humanity” for emphasizing therapy for Ugandan homosexuals. The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), a George Soros-funded Marxist group that regularly defends terrorists and their American enablers.

Sarah Palin has said “those responsible for this SWAT-ing must be held accountable by the law.”

U.S. Senator Saxby Chambliss, R-GA, has asked Eric Holder’s Justice Department to investigate the wave of false reports.

Camenker warns such harassment techniques are not confined to bloggers or those involved in the pro-life, pro-family movement. “This could happen to anybody,” he said, “unless the conservative movement starts to wake up and take this seriously.”

Contact:
Attorney General William J. Schneider of Maine
The Contact form here may be used.
(207) 626-8800
6 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

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

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, , , ,

The first pro-abortion Republican enters the 2016 presidential race

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

EXETER, NH, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The large and expanding field of would-be Republican presidential candidates grew by one today, as George Pataki became the first GOP presidential hopeful this election season to openly support abortion-on-demand.

The 69-year-old long-shot candidate also has a history of supporting homosexual legislative causes.

In the weeks leading up to his formal announcement, George Pataki took out TV ads asking Republicans to refrain from talking about abortion and gay “marriage,” branding them “distractions.”

“In 12 years [as governor], I don’t think I talked about that issue twice,” he once said of abortion.

On same-sex “marriage,” he says, “I think, leave it to the states. I don’t think it’s a role in Washington.”

However, Pataki has a long history of enacting the homosexual political agenda as governor of New York from 1994-2006. He signed a “hate crimes” law that added the words “gay” and “lesbian” to New York state law for the first time.

He signed the Sexual Orientation Nondiscrimination Act (SONDA), which prohibits business owners from “discriminating” against homosexuals in housing or hiring, with an exemption only for religious institutions.

He also added sexual orientation to state civil rights laws, alongside such immutable characteristics as race and sex, in an apparent quid pro quo for a gay activist group's endorsement in his last run for governor. The New York Times reported that, under pressure from Pataki, the then-Senate Majority Leader “shifted his position on the bill as part of what is tacitly acknowledged, even by Senator [Joseph] Bruno's senior aides, to have been a deal to win an endorsement for Governor Pataki from the state's largest gay rights group, the Empire State Pride Agenda.”

After the LGBT activist group endorsed Pataki in 2002, citing a long list of his service to the homosexual political cause, Pataki personally lobbied senators for the bill's passage, then signed it into law that December.

Coupled with his stance on gun control, environmentalism, and other issues, he stands well to the left of the Republican mainstream.

The three-term governor of New York, who belongs to the Roman Catholic Church, took his own advice by largely avoiding social issues today. The closest he came was his vow, “I'd repeal oppressive laws like ObamaCare and end Common Core.”

He added that he would “fire every current IRS employee abusing government power to discriminate on the basis of politics or religion. That is not America!”

Otherwise, Pataki's announcement speech hewed to stand pat Republican issues like reducing taxes, shrinking the number of federal employees, increasing military spending, and supporting entrepreneurship.

He began by thanking his supporters, in English and Spanish.

Smiling, his head pivoting between twin teleprompters, he said, “Let me tell you some of the things I'd do right away to get oppressive government off the backs of Americans.”

He would institute a lifetime ban on congressmen acting as lobbyists after they leave office. “If you ever served one day in Congress, you will never be a lobbyist,” he said. He favors forcing Congress to live under the laws it passes, so there will be “no special rules for the powerful.”

He cited his history of cutting taxes, reducing welfare rolls, and leaving his state with billions of dollars in surplus. “That's what our policies can do,” he said. “I know we can do the same thing for the United States.”

In recent weeks, he has called for a more interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East. Today, he reminded his audience that he was governor of New York in 9/11. “I will not fear the lesson of September 11,” he said. “To protect us, first we must protect the border,” he said – an unexpected phrase, as Pataki supports amnesty for the at least 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

“We will stand with our ally, Israel, a democracy on the front lines of terror and barbarism,” he said.

Like former Sen. Rick Santorum, who announced he is running for president yesterday, Pataki agreed that “if necessary, American forces will be used to actually defeat and destroy ISIS on the ground” – although he promised not to become “the world's policeman.”

Some of his campaign promises drew skepticism, such as seeking to develop self-driving cars and to cure Alzheimer's disease and cancer within the next decade.

The speech's venue was chosen deliberately by Pataki, who considered entering the presidential race in 2000, 2008, and 2012. The town of Exeter, New Hampshire, claims to be the founding place of the Republican Party. (Ripon, Wisconsin, makes a similar claim.)

More importantly, the first-in-the-nation primary skews more libertarian on social issues than evangelical-dominated Iowa and South Carolina, so Pataki has essentially staked his candidacy on doing well in New Hampshire. Fellow pro-abortion Republican Rudy Giuliani made a similar bet in 2008, banking on a good showing among transplanted New Yorkers in the Florida primary. He left the race after finishing a distant third.

Short of a stunning upset in the Granite State, Pataki has little chance of breaking through the pack this year. A Fox News poll ranks him dead last among 16 announced and potential candidates. Holly Bailey of Yahoo! News said, “George Pataki would never say this, but you do have to wonder if he's sort of, maybe, gaming for vice president.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Pataki is not the first “pro-choice” Republican to run for president.  Giuliani (who supported partial birth abortion) and Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore (another potential 2016 candidate, who supports abortion during the first trimester) ran in 2008. Twelve years earlier, both California Gov. Pete Wilson and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter supported abortion-on-demand. Arlen Specter later left the party and became a Democrat.

In 1988, General Alexander Haig opposed a human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So did Texas Gov. John Connally in 1980.

George H.W. Bush supported abortion and voted for Planned Parenthood funding early in his career but changed his position by the time he ran for president the second time, in 1988.

President Gerald Ford was the last Republican nominee to proclaim himself “pro-choice.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Steve Jalsevac / LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

, , , ,

Ireland ‘defied God’ by voting for gay ‘marriage’: Cardinal Burke

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

OXFORD, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Cardinal Raymond Burke lamented how formerly Catholic Ireland has gone further than the pagans in the pre-Christian days of old and “defied God” by calling homosexual behavior “marriage” in the referendum last week.

“I mean, this is a defiance of God. It’s just incredible. Pagans may have tolerated homosexual behaviours, they never dared to say this was marriage,” he told the Newman Society, Oxford University’s Catholic organization, in an address Wednesday about the intellectual heritage of Pope Benedict XVI. The Tablet, Britain’s liberal Catholic newspaper, reported his remarks.

On Friday, 1.2 million Irish people voted to amend the country’s constitution to say: “Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.” A little over 734,000 people voted against the proposal. 

Burke said that he could not understand “any nation redefining marriage.”

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

The cardinal also emphasized the important role that parents play in protecting their children in a culture increasingly hostile to God’s laws. “The culture is thoroughly corrupted, if I may say so, and the children are being exposed to this, especially through the internet,” he said. One practical piece of advice that he offered families was to put computers in public areas to prevent children from “imbib[ing] this poison that’s out there.”

During the same Oxford visit, but during a homily at a Mass the day before, Burke called marriage between a man and woman a “fundamental truth” that has been “ignored, defied, and violated.”

Burke warned during the homily of the dangers of “various ideological currents” and of “human deception and trickery which strives to lead us into error.”

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
John Stonestreet

,

Why young Christians can’t grasp our arguments against gay ‘marriage’

John Stonestreet
By John Stonestreet

May 28, 2015 (BreakPoint.org) -- For five years, Dr. Abigail Rine has been teaching a course on gender theory at George Fox University, an evangelical school in the Quaker tradition.

At the beginning of the semester, she tells her students that “they are guaranteed to read something they will find disagreeable, probably even offensive.”

Writing at FirstThings.com recently, she related how five years ago it was easy to find readings that challenged and even offended the evangelical college students “considering the secular bent of contemporary gender studies.”

But today, things are different. “Students now,” she says, “arrive in my class thoroughly versed in the language and categories of identity politics; they are reticent to disagree with anything for fear of seeming intolerant—except, of course, what they perceive to be intolerant.”

And what do they find “intolerant”? Well, in her class, an essay entitled “What is Marriage?” by Sherif Girgis, Robert George, and Ryan Anderson, which was the beginning of the book “What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense.”

In their article, Girgis, George, and Anderson defend what they call the conjugal view of marriage. “Marriage,” they write, “is the union of a man and a woman who make a permanent and exclusive commitment to each other … that is naturally fulfilled by bearing and rearing children together.” They defend this view against what they call the “revisionist view” of marriage, which redefines marriage to include, among other things, same-sex couples.

“My students hate it,” Dr. Rine wrote. They “lambast the article.” “They also,” she adds, “seem unable to fully understand the argument.” And again, these are evangelical students at an evangelical school.

The only argument for conjugal marriage they’ve ever encountered has been the wooden proof-texting from the Bible. And besides, wrote Rine, “What the article names as a ‘revisionist’ idea of marriage—marriage as an emotional, romantic, sexual bond between two people—does not seem ‘new’ to my students at all, because this is the view of marriage they were raised with, albeit with a scriptural, heterosexual gloss.”

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

As Rine points out “the redefinition of marriage began decades ago” when “the link between sexuality and procreation was severed in our cultural imagination.”

And if marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction,” then it seems mean-spirited to Rine’s students to argue that marriage by its very nature excludes same-sex couples.

And where do students get the idea that marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction”? Well, everywhere—television, church, school, their homes, in youth groups.

Rine writes, “As I consider my own upbringing and the various ‘sex talks’ I encountered in evangelical church settings over the past twenty years, I realize that the view of marital sex presented there was primarily revisionist.”

In other words, once you say, “I do,” you get “the gift” of sex which is presented as “a ‘gift’ largely due to its [erotic], unitive properties, rather than its intrinsic capacity to create life.” Even in the Church, children have become an optional add-on to married life rather than its primary purpose.

What can we do to win back our children, our churches, and the culture? In our recent book “Same Sex Marriage,” Sean McDowell and I lay out a game plan. We offer strategies for the short-term and the long-term, with the ultimate goal: re-shaping the cultural imagination towards what God intended marriage to be, starting with the church. Come to BreakPoint.org to pick up your copy.

As Chuck Colson once said in a BreakPoint commentary about marriage, “We Christians are very good at saying ‘No.’ But we’ve got to get better at saying ‘Yes’: showing how God’s plan for humanity is a blessing. That His ways, including faithful, life-giving marriage between one man and one woman, lead to human flourishing physically, emotionally, and spiritually.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Reprinted with permission from Break Point.

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook