Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Why No Jew Should Vote For Joe Lhota, vote For Erick Salgado On The School Choice Line


If You Vote For Joe Lhota You telling the world that you don't care about same gender "marriage", abortion on demand, drugs etc.  Future candidates will take note and ignore these issues in the future (and future social issues) .  We need to send a message nationally that it doesn't pay to be a Socially Liberal Republican.  If you want to make a Kiddush Hashem, not make a Chillul Hashem, be a or lagoyim and a part of mamleches kohanim vegoy kadosh vote for Erick Salgado (the ONLY mayor candidate who believes in morality) On The School Choice Line!


If done by enough people it could have national implication and help stem the tide of Republicans becoming liberal Democrats when it comes to morality!

Why No Jew Should Vote For Chris Christie!

Currently, there is a grave issue in this country with Republican politicians caving in on same gender "marriage" and other devastating homosexual bills.


There are currently 3 Republican Senators in favor of same gender "marriage", including 2 in states where there is a large Orthodox population (Rob Portman- Ohio, Mark Kirk- Illinois, Lisa Murkowski-Alaska).  Last year there were none.  All these senators ran on a morality platform and have betrayed their constituents. Politicians do this because they know you are going to vote for them anyways. The only way to prevent them from voting like socially liberal democrats is if you don't vote for them.  

Recently, John McCain wrote an article condemning Russia's laws prohibiting the homosexual propaganda (teaching in schools about homosexuality, banning parades, etc). 
  • They write laws to codify bigotry against people whose sexual orientation they condemn.  (John McCain)
 Most prominently, former president, George W. Bush, was a witness in a same gender "marriage".

In fact the Washington Post Recently Wrote An Article Titled "Gay rights supporters wage a quiet campaign to push Republicans to the middle.  Furthermore they wrote

  • "But by proactively retracting his appeal, Christie gave voters in his blue state another reason to pull the lever for him in next month’s election.   Dropping the appeal did something else. It was an exhibition of the kind of leadership more national aspirants in the GOP would do well to emulate. Denying those couples the rights and responsibilities that come with civil marriage, denying anyone the full benefits of the American Dream, is not a winning strategy."     (Washington Post)
 Finally Christie has done more for the Toevah agenda then all the previous NJ governors put together. He passed a law that mandated teaching about homosexuality in public schools, banned therapy to help children lose their unwanted homosexual desires, and allowed same gender "marriage" to pass in the courts.
 
If you vote for Christie after he finalized the same gender "marriage", you will in essence be telling Republicans around the country you don't care about moral issues and that will lead to more Republicans caving in to the homosexual lobby. If you don't vote for Christie, but write in a vote in mass "no gay marriage" and Christie loses a lot of support because of that, Republicans around the country will be less likely to cave in to the homosexual lobby.

New Jersey Teaching Homosexuality Bill (Read About What Happened In NY because of a similar law)

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Aroni Satmar's Moshe Indig Donated $1000 To David Weprin After Rabbanim Says It Was Asur

Indig Donation

This donation was a few days after the Psak Halacha against donating money to Weprin was widely released!

  • It is therefore Assur [forbidden according to Torah law] to vote for, campaign for, publicly honor, fund, or otherwise support the campaign of NY Assembylman David Weprin, now running to succeed Anthony Weiner in the 9th Congressional district.


So why should we listen to Moshe Indig regarding Casinos!

Aroni Satmar "Logic" Voting Against Harmful And Immoral Legislation Is Assur, Voting Against Moral Candidate Who Risked Their Careers For Us Is Good

 הוֹי הָאֹמְרִים לָרַע טוֹב, וְלַטּוֹב רָע

 (יְשַׁעְיָהוּ 5-20) 

Op-Ed: We Are Not Fighting the Gaming Initiative Nor Should We

"Rabbi" to see where he got his semicha see the Rashi on Bava Metzia 84a divri hamskil Rebbe karo li Moishe Indig (the Avg high School Beis Yakov Girl knows more then he does) who's also a known slumlord  

highlights ours

 On Election Day, Tuesday November 5th, New York voters will find on the ballot an initiative called “Proposal 1” allowing the State to sanction the building of seven Casino gaming resorts throughout the State, including in Sullivan County; the home of many Orthodox Jewish summer camps and vacation homes.
This initiative is strongly supported by the vast majority of elected officials, from local to State Governments, from Liberal Democrats to Conservative Republicans and opposed by rabbaniem; from Employers to workers. The referendum is extremely "important" to the New York State Government in general and to County and municipal governments in particular as they desperately need the influx of revenue immorality, drugs, and gambling problems that these gaming resorts will generate. Governor Andrew Cuomo’s budget office projects that the creation of additional “destination gaming resorts” will yield 10,000 jobs and $430 million in new annual tax dollars according to a law passed by the Legislature millions of dollars spent on fighting gambling addictions, crime etc. which the negative amount of dollars left over needs to be spent toward schools, property tax relief and aid to local governments.

Having said that, we also know that, we – as Orthodox Jews – don’t condone gambling in itself given the potential downsides that it can bring with it such as addiction, family and financial ruin. But on the other hand we are aware that the Orthodox Jewish Community has 1) thousands of Yeshiva/Kollel students who spend their time studying, 2) thousands of low wage earners, and 3) very large families all in need of Government Assistance. Furthermore, the Orthodox Jewish summer camps are religious institutions that occupy hundreds of acres of land in Sullivan County, with much lower tax obligations than if they’d be occupied by private or commercial entities.

We as a community need to understand that we shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds us. read the article on the bottom of the page We recognize that the State and local governments that help us in so many ways should have new forms of revenue that they so desperately need to pay their bills which includes assisting the Jewish Community. Furthermore, as part-time citizens of the Catskills, we developed a close relationship with the local and municipal governments and we appreciate the help that they are to us. They are all begging for more funds! 
 As the Jewish principle of “Hakoros Hatov” – showing appreciation to those who are good to you, we should not fight an initiative that would help them read the article on the bottom of the page, also hakoros hatov does not mean I have to do what ever the person wants even if it will harm me. Additionally, our Great Grand Rabbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum ZTL I wonder why he didn't add this, is he really Lubavitch, fiercely opposed “Hisgaros B’umos” which has nothing to do with gambling but has a lot to do with normal Satmar voting habits read the article on the bottom of the page   – provoking our non-Jewish neighbors how come Satmar doesn't feel the same way about the water pipe plan (I have no problem with the water pipe plan but according to "harav hagoan" Moshe Indig it's Hisgaros B’umos). When we see the financial benefits that the State and local governments are set to gain from this initiative, when we see the millions in property tax relief this will bring to millions of New Yorkers, when we see that the Governor, Democrats, Republicans, employers and unions all back this initiative, we should not be the ones provoking them by actively opposing it. As Jews in “Golus” (Exile) we live at the mercy of the Government. It is therefore against the teachings of Torah and our Sages to impose our beliefs onto the Government. but to hold them ransom for money is muter?

Let me be clear: Every citizen has been given the right to vote his conscious and what he/she feels is the right thing to do. But to organize a movement against the benefit of our government, on a referendum that will not infringe on our Torah and Mitzvos or on our culture and way of life, is contrary to the way we were taught by our "Great" Grand "Rabbi" of Satmar aron teitelbaum. Better yet, gaming to a certain levels already exists all over New York but Orthodox Jews mostly do not gamble because we don’t believe in it, but others do. We should not be here to change it especially that New York literally losses billions of dollars from the expanded gaming business that existing in the states neighboring New York. These billions can be here in New York and beneffit the very governments and neighbors on whose help and mercy we live.

No problem according to "rabbi"  Moshe Indig
As for the worries that some people have if we expand gaming in New York, let me address a few of them:

Traffic: For those of you who are concerned about the traffic congestion that the casinos will cause in the Catskills and elsewhere, let me remind you that we are causing the same amount of congestion during the two summer months that we spend in the Catskills! Take a drive up to the Catskills in middle of the winter, and compare the busiest winter day to the slowest summer day. It’s literally two worlds but when locals complain about it, we say that they should appreciate the business that we bring during the Summer. It’s a valid point but why should we not appreciate the business that the gaming industry will bring to the region? Besides, as part of the gaming plan and with the influx of additional revenue, roads and highways leading up the Catskills Region will be expanded. The Industry does not want its customers stuck in traffic. if this was the only problem I wouldn't write this editorial

Crime: Those who claim that gaming will bring a rise in crime should be reminded that local law enforcement agencies – whether it’s the municipal police departments or the Sullivan County Sheriff, or the NY State Police – are all doing a superb crime-fighting job. The influx of revenue that the gaming industry will bring will permit these departments and agencies to expand their forces to secure the safety of the region. It’s for the benifit of the gaming industry, the locals and the state alike. so if crime goes up (which you agree with) it's OK as long as there are more police officers to take care of it?

The Fabric of Orthodox Jewry: Some are concerned that expanding gaming will lure more of our youngsters into gambling, but let’s be honest about it: There are multiple casinos easily accessible to Orthodox Jews in NYC and the surrounding counties yet only a very small percent of Orthodox Jews are into it. so lets build one in Kiryas Joel Expanding what is already out there will not change this reality which am I more likely to go to Atlantic City or a casino right near my camp on my off day? . In fact, we all remember that the neighborhood of Williamsburg, Brooklyn was up in arms about the Steiner Studio coming to the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Alarmists warned that it will destroy the fabric of the neighborhood and that Williamsburg will never be the same, but more than a decade later, the Steiner Studio is there, the neighborhood is the same, and many locals don’t even know that there’s a movie studio in their own back yard. only someone with a Satmar education would compare a Casino with a movie studio where the problems stay inside the studio
I understand the emotion that this issue may bring to the community but we need to move forward with due diligence; not emotion or fear-mongering. Based on all of the points I outlined above, I’m here to make our stance clear: we are not fighting, nor should we be fighting this gaming initiative known as “Proposal 1”.


500G SINKS A STALWART. Angry gay man's revenge


GOP Rep. Sue Kelly won't leave office until January, but she may have ended her political career Sept. 30, 2004. That was the day she voted for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage - and caught the attention of a Westchester County constituent, Adam Rose. The openly gay real estate developer son of a legendary builder, Rose, 47, would ultimately sink half a million dollars - an extraordinary amount even by the standards of cash-rich American politics - into defeating Kelly. "I woke up one day and discovered that my member of Congress had voted to prevent me and my partner from marrying each other," Rose said last week. "I became incensed.

" He resolved to do "anything I could do to take her out.

" Kelly, who represents the city's northernmost suburbs, lost last Tuesday to Democrat John Hall by a slim 2% margin. Her loss came as a surprise even to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which had largely ignored Hall's bid. Hall ran an energetic, grass-roots-driven campaign, and he benefited from a Democratic wave. But everyone from MoveOn.org to Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert has claimed credit for helping the musician - best known for the 1970s pop hits "Still the One" and "Dance with Me" - to victory. Hall also benefited, however, from the continuing power that a single, wealthy individual with nothing at stake beyond his personal beliefs wields in American elections. Rose's money produced a series of harsh television and radio attacks in the final weeks of the race. No one in the district, however, made the connection between the marriage vote and the massive campaign against Kelly, run through an independent group called Majority Action, which hit her for taking contributions from oil companies. The group also linked her to the scandal over former Florida GOP Rep. Mark Foley's relationship with teenage pages. "They were basically calling her a coddler of pedophiles," her campaign consultant, Jay Townsend, said bitterly. "It was legal, but it was filthy politics, and nobody up there knew where it was coming from or what the purpose behind it was.
" According to filings with the IRS, Rose effectively underwrote Majority Action's campaign against Kelly, giving a $500,000 check to the group Sept. 29, and persuading friends and relatives to contribute tens of thousands more. He spent in a few weeks half of what Hall spent for his entire campaign. He was Majority Action's largest individual donor, and Majority Action spent more in Kelly's district than in any other, according to the group's executive director, Mark Longabaugh. Before Rose went on the attack, he invited Kelly to the home in Lewisboro he has shared with his partner since 1994. She came alone on Feb. 4, and glanced at the 47-acre property, complete with outbuildings and domestic staff. She told him she had backed the amendment to ban same gender "marriage" in part because of the scruples of her Orthodox Jewish constituents in the enclave of Kiryas Joel. She pledged to win back his support by pushing for other gay-friendly issues - in particular an end to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy I somehow doubt she would have supported that Kelly would have supported that if Satmar was strong on following the Torah.  Rose contributed what he could to Hall, and helped him raise more money. And then, in September, he called Majority Action. "I'm this guy in New York you've never heard of and I want to do anything I can to beat Sue Kelly," he recalled saying. "I'm sending you $500,000. I need your address.

" On Election Night, he swung by the victory party of Hall, who supports same-sex marriage. Then he drove home and watched the returns on television, elated as Kelly's loss became clear. (The defeat came, ironically, in part from Rose's money and also in part from the decision of Kiryas Joel to back the Democrat Hall.) "I was really happy, because I felt that the American system really works," Rose said.
since majority of all people in the district besides satmar were for Kelly Satmar violated Hisgaros B’umos

Gay Terrorists Sue Cab Company For Not Allowing Them To Kiss In His Taxi

A gay Chicago couple is suing a cab company and one of its drivers for allegedly kicking them out of his cab for kissing.

The men are seeking compensatory damages in their suit.
 (NBC)

On a stormy night in May, Steven White and Matthew McCrea were in a cab heading into the city from O’Hare International Airport, sharing a giggle over a silly YouTube video, when McCrea leaned in and kissed his boyfriend.

A moment later, cab driver Jama Anshur began turning the interior lights on and off, telling his passengers, “This is public transportation.” Then, according to the couple, the driver swerved off the Kennedy Expy. and demanded the couple get out — on the shoulder, in the pelting rain.

“My initial reaction was that I was afraid of this man, and I didn’t know what he was thinking,” said White, 29, of West Hollywood, Calif., who at the time was visiting McCrea, a Lake View resident. “Matt’s initial reaction was that we are not getting out of this cab on the expressway.”

On Monday, White and McCrea filed a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, claiming cabbie Anshur and his company at the time, Sun Taxi, discriminated against them.

Anshur, a cabbie for eight years, told the Chicago Sun-Times he wasn’t kicking out his passengers when he pulled off the freeway. He was annoyed because they wouldn’t stop kissing.

“I told them to stop,” said Anshur. “It was raining. I couldn’t drive with something like that. I have to drive safely because it’s raining.”

The couple deny they were engaged in anything but a very brief kiss. And they say their ordeal didn’t end there.

Anshur then swerved back into traffic, before eventually pulling into a grocery parking lot in Park Ridge, the couple say. White called 311 on his cell phone and was eventually connected to 911. The complaint alleges the cab driver told arriving police that his passengers had been “making sex” in his cab — something White and McCrea strongly deny.

No arrests were made, and the couple got out of the cab and waited for another one to come pick them up.
“It was a scary situation,” said McCrea. “You feel helpless. I can’t control what someone else does. When you see that kind of behavior, you’re nervous [and think], what’s going on here?”

Back in May, a spokesman for Anshur’s cab company, Sun Taxi, said he hadn’t seen the complaint Monday and had no comment.

Jong Lee, Sun Taxi’s general manager, said the cab driver was released “right after the incident.” so the company fires the cab driver and the gay terrorists still sue them

Anshur said he’s been treated unfairly. He says he doesn’t like any sort of prolonged smooching — gay or straight — in his cab. And he says his passengers on that May night were rude to him.

“They say, you are the driver,” said Anshur, who said he now drives for Yellow Cab. “Your job is to drive. Turn around and drive.”

Yellow Cab officials were not available to comment.

Though Anshur says he’s not anti-gay, he says he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman.

“That’s my religion,” Anshur said.

The couple, who have been engaged in their long-distance relationship for about eight months, is, among other things, seeking “compensatory and other damages,” according to the complaint, filed by Lambda Legal, a national civil rights organization that advocates for the LGBT community.

“We just hope to bring some attention to this issue in the hopes that it doesn’t happen to other people,” White said. “We’re really lucky that in the State of Illinois, the LGBT community is protected, and so these kinds of things shouldn’t be happening.”

Until the incident in May, the couple hadn’t given much thought to brief displays of affection in public.

“Unfortunately, now I kind of have to think about this stuff,” McCrea said. “I might be a little more cautious about how I act around other people in a cab.”

White says he refuses to change his behavior.

We’re a couple just like any other couple,” White said. notice what they really want
(Chicago Sun Times) highlights mine

Air Force Drops "So Help Me God" From Oath Because Of Atheist Terrorists

Air Force Academy
DENVER -- DENVER (AP) — Air Force Academy cadets are no longer required to say "so help me God" at the end of the Honor Oath, school officials said Friday.

The words were made optional after a complaint from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group, that they violated the constitutional concept of religious freedom.

Academy Superintendent Lt. Gen. Michelle Johnson said the change was made to respect cadets' freedom of religion.

The oath states, "We will not lie, steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does. Furthermore, I resolve to do my duty and to live honorably, so help me God."

Cadets are required to take the oath once a year, academy spokesman Maj. Brus Vidal said.

Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, welcomed the change but questioned how it will be applied.

If the person leading the oath includes the words, cadets who choose not to say them might feel vulnerable to criticism, he said.

"What does it mean, 'optional'?" Weinstein said. "The best thing is to eliminate it."

Vidal said the oath is led by the Cadet Wing honor chair, a student, and that person will also have the option to use or not use the words.

Academy officials did not immediately return a follow-up call seeking comment on Weinstein's question.

The West Point equivalent oath does not include the words "so help me God," said Frank DeMaro, a school spokesman. It states, "A cadet will not lie, cheat or steal, or tolerate those who do."

Officials at the U.S. Naval Academy did not immediately return a call. "The Honor Concept" on the Naval Academy website includes similar proscriptions against lying, cheating and stealing but includes no religious reference.

The Air Force Academy outside Colorado Springs has about 4,000 cadets. When they graduate, they are commissioned as second lieutenants.
(AP)

Monday, October 28, 2013

David Greenfield Voted That Congress (You) Should Pay For Abortions

read the entire bill
 So David Greenfield want's congress to pay for "Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care" which includes abortions!

Read about some of David Greenfield's other anti Torah votes supporting toevah "marriage", supporting Late Term Abortions.

Do You Want To Pay For Abortions?
Vote Against Greenfield Tuesday November 5th

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Why The Aroniem Support The Casino

  • “Our community is always here to support whatever...is the benefit of our state and county,  That is why we are not against the proposal to authorize casino gaming, because it is in (favor) of our great Sullivan County.”             Moshe Indig

 Moshe Indig a known as a slumlord, a complete am aharotez, and supported of one of the biggest toevah supporters in congress.

I call on all aroniem to follow the Torah.

when voting stop following Moshe Indig and Aaron Teitelbaum, instead follow Moshe Rabbainu and Aaron Hakohen


So why do the aroniem support the casino?  they think they'll get $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Greenfield Argued That Borough Park/Flatbush Should Be Put In The Same Congressional District As Greenwich Village And Harlem, Nullifying Our Vote

David Greenfield argued in favor of this district which completely nullifies our votes, Joseph Hayon argued against this district
Nadler's district Manhattan-Brooklyn 3-1 split
that Greenfield helped make
 City Councilman David Greenfield is now running, against the pro Torah Joseph Hayon to become Borough Park and Flatbush's next City Councilman. However this is not the first time these 2 faced off with each other. Both Joseph Hayon and David Greenfield testified during the Congressional redistricting hearings. However only one, Joseph Hayon of them argued on behalf of Brooklyn's Jewish (and Cathlioc for that matter) Communities.  David Greenfield argued in favor of a district that places Borough Park, Flatbush, and Bensonhurst in a district that includes Greenwich Village/Chelsea the Gay Capital of the East Coast.  In the last election the anti Torah Jerry Nadler who has made publicly mocked Orthodox Jews because they oppose homosexuality won by a landslide due to the support coming from Manhattan.  Manhattan had more then 3 times as many votes as Brooklyn making it impossible to get rid of Jerry Nadler, or even have him advocate for or interests.  Instead Nadler is the leading advocate for homosexual laws in the country and openly mocks us.  He has a record that has harmed the Jewish community spiritually, physically and financially!  The judges even cited David Greenfield as one of the reason that Brooklyn's Jewish community should be placed in a liberal Manhattan district.
David Greenfield argued against this district, Joseph Hayon argued in favor this district

David Greenfield's testimony (on page 182) highlights are for clarification bolds are for emphasis on David Greenfield betrayal
  • COUNCILMAN GREENFIELD : My name is David Greenfield , I'm a member of the New York City Council. I represent approximately 165,000 people in parts of Kensington Borough Park , Bensonhurst and Midwood . I'm also the only Orthodox Jewish member of the City Council, and so due to the time limitations my testimony today will focus on the impact that the proposed lines will have on the Orthodox Jewish Community

    First , I want to thank you service . I understand this role was thrust upon you by the inaction of the State Legislature, and considering the serious time constraints you have put together an impressive set of plans. 

    Southern Brooklyn is home to the largest concentration and fastest growing Orthodox Jewish community in the United States of America . I believe this to be community of interest

    The 200,000 or so Orthodox Jews live in the contiguous communities Kensington, Borough Park , Bensonhurst , Gravesend, Midwood, and Marine Park . While the proposed lines do a great job of protecting half of Southern Brooklyn's 200,000 Orthodox Jewish community , I think that they accidentally ignore the other half . And I say, " Accidentall , " because as the judge pointed out , how are you to know specifically the ethnic make - up of those particular communities and that's actually why I am here today . Specifically, the proposed lines do an out standing job in combining the Kensington, Borough Park and, Bensonhurst communities, roughly half the communities under the newly created 10th Congressional District.the map on the top that is majority in Manhattan and is currently represented by Nadler YMS  These lines consolidate these communities of interest along with other communities of interest such as, for example, the large Orthodox Jewish community of the Upper West Side of Manhattan the upper West Side is less then 5% Orthodox even with very liberal definitions, furthermore in order to get from Borough Park to the Upper West Side you need to pass through the gay and super liberal Greenwich Village. We thank you for this portion of the proposal as the Kensington , Borough Park, and Bensonhurst areas will be represented under this plan the plan included Harlem with Brooklyn's Jewish communities.

    Unfortunately , the other half of the community , roughly a hundred thousand or so , Orthodox Jews in the Gravesend , Midwood , and Marine Park neighborhoods they are split into three different congressional districts which thereby dilutes their voice and their ability to be with similar like - minded communities of interest . So I therefore ask that you keep the proposed 10th Congressional District Nadler's Manhattan based district intact while separately combining the areas of Gravesend , Midwood , and Marine Park within one area to be part of a congressional district, specifically , I would ask that this new district, which would incorporate the rough borders of 18th Avenue to Avenue Z running north to south , and McDonald Avenue to Flatbush Avenue running east to west be part of the old 9th Congressional District that was eliminated and our votes would be nullified by the African American Neighborhoods in Brooklyn , the one that is currently represented by Congressman Bob Turner . It's not just that these are communities of interest in terms of Orthodox Jewish religion and culture , I also believe that the communities are entitled to be able to express themselves with an ideology so before he was saying that Greenwich Village represents Borough Park's ideology   that does not necessarily always reflect all of their neighbors, and lies at the heart of those political realitiesAlternatively , I would suggest that these communities of interest be combined into proposed 11th Congressional District, which would give them the opportunity to be give with other community of interest specifically the Orthodox Jewish community of Staten Island . Thank you very much.
  • CIRCUIT JUDGE LYNCH : Just so I understand . You don't think at least your ideal proposal would not take in people from Borough Park and move them into an other district that was combined with other South Brooklyn Jewish communities. You' re satisfied with that piece that completely nullifies the Jewish vote in favor of Liberals, but you're interested in taking the communities to the east of there and linking them in some way either to what's now the proposed 8th which is a majority black district, and includes Bedford–Stuyvesant, or what' s now the proposed 11th . Is that the idea ? 
  • COUNCILMAN GREENFIELD : Let me just be clear . I think it's a two - part question , if I may . So part one I would say that the community that I represent notice how Greenfield is speaking for all of Borough Park I think is very satisfied with the plans of the 10th Congressional District are you happy being in the same district as The largest gay "community" on the east coast and being represented by Jerry Nadler. We notice how he's speaking for all of Borough Park don't believe that we need to have a district that encompasses the entire community or try to elect an Orthodox Jew . I can say that honestly because I would probably benefit the most if such a district would be created so this baal geyva thinks that we would elect him to congress?. That's not we're looking for, we're just looking for the communities to have a voice like in Nadler's district we have a voice?. So you have a hundred thousand roughly Orthodox Jews Kensington, Borough Park, and Bensonhurst we're now currently in the 10th , that's great if you are for homosexuality and liberalism, and don't want Shuls getting money from FEMA. The problem is on the other side they're sort of broken up . So what I've proposed is that let's either go back to the - - once again , I understand the burdens that you have in terms of trying to balance this all so that's why I ' m trying to give some possibilities . Potentially go back to the 9th where we can incorporate this community , or perhaps combine them with the current 11 th . For example, honestly, if we're speaking frankly, the 9th, current proposed 9th District , which is currently represented by an individual whose views and values do not mesh very well with the Orthodox Jewish community he's referring to Yevette Clarke and is correct but Nadlers doesn't fit with us any better then Clarke . And so, I would propose that those communities specifically the communities of Midwood , Gravesend , and Marine Park they should be combined into one area to give those communities a fair voice. and he has no problem if they would be linked together with Bedford–Stuyvesant

Joseph Hayon's testimony highlights are for clarification and important missing information
  • MR . HAYON : Thank you very much . My name is Joseph Hayon.
    My mother is born in South America and my father is born in Egypt Brooklyn . I am currently President of the Brooklyn Tea Party and former assembly candidate in the 45th District , South Brooklyn, where I reside. I'm also a resident of the 9th Congressional District , Bob Turner, and I'm here to actually support the map the 2nd map in green submitted by the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty. What the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty did was they combined Bob Turner's district together with Mike Grimm. The reason for this is even though 25 percent of Orthodox Jews live in Bob Turner's current district, the number one issue of the Orthodox Jewish community was completely ignored by Bob Turner. In fact, because we're only 25 percent , and not 40 or 50 percent, this number one issue in the Orthodox Jewish community is completely ignored . For this reason , I also strongly support District 2 submitted by the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty which is currently not a district it combines a little bit of Nadler's district which is proposed by the maps by the magistrate , Ms . Mann
    In addition to that , I also reached out to two assembly representatives . I only spoke to representatives , I didn't speak to the assemblymen themselves , Hakeem Jeffries and Kareem Camara, and when I asked them to take a look , and I only spoke to the representatives spoke to representatives , and I asked them to take a look at the map submitted by Orthodox Alliance For Liberty, on first glance they seemed to be okay with it . District 5 of the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty, which is the old District 12 it makes a Spanish district for the Spanish community . We also have District 4 and District 5 by the Orthodox Alliance it's District 12 and District 13 , former District 5 and former District 4 , they put the Orthodox Jewish community together as well . Overall , the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty tried , to the best of my knowledge , tried their best to submit something so that this Court wouldn't have to start from scratch but to start with something somewhat presentable . My understanding is that the map submitted by them is not constitutional because it's - - it doesn't have the exact numbers per se, but I believe that this court can make those maps constitutional not just to help the Orthodox Jewish community but to help the African - American community , to help the Spanish American community , to help all the communities that live in Brooklyn . And that would be communities, definitely communities of interest of all interests , all communities are submitted in the Brooklyn portion of the map submitted by the Orthodox Alliance For Liberty 

The Court in it's decision Even Quoted Greenfield, as one of the excuses to not allow the Jewish community to be united in one district, and thus nullifying our votes
  •  The proposed solutions also varied.
  • One public official Greenfield noted that the Orthodox population was insufficient to constitute a majority in any single district . He suggested that the Recommended Plan adequately concentrated what he characterized as about half of the Orthodox residents of South Brooklyn ( those residing in Borough Park) in Recommended District 10 Nadler's district , but he argued that more easterly residents were divided among several districts and could beneficially be unified.
  •  These divergences mostly Greenfield's suggest the difficulties, even under ideal conditions, of identifying and satisfying the particular concerns of the objectors

12 Examples Of Gay Terrorism


THE GAYING OF AMERICA
12 chilling incidents of LGBT tyranny 
by Linda Harvey


And the good news is, there’s now proof. The abuses of homosexual empowerment are being documented with evidence piling up week by week. Everyday Americans are the victims, but we can learn from these incidents so others won’t be targeted as well.

The truth is “sexual orientation/gender identity non-discrimination” translates to a carte blanche to compel respect for deviance. If you decline, you will pay – your constitutional rights are a joke to militant homosexuals. Here are a dozen recent incidents that tell the story:

Gay bullying incident No. 1: A bakery in Oregon called Sweet Cakes by Melissa recently shut its doors. Why? Some time back, two lesbians wanted to order a cake for their same-sex ceremony, but owners Aaron and Melissa Klein turned them down, explaining that same-sex “marriage” isn’t consistent with their faith as Christians. The women left, and next thing they knew Sweet Cakes was sued for discrimination.
Then came intense, negative media coverage, vicious phone calls and emails, protesters, threats against their children, a boycott, then a boycott of all their suppliers, followed by an investigation by the Oregon Labor Commission, which recommended “rehabilitation.” Aaron Klein said he was forced to close his bakery because of homosexual mob tactics.
No, this isn’t Berlin 1938. It’s the birth of tyranny in America 2013.
You might think people in government agencies even on the Left Coast have better things to do. Or you might think, “Surely we Americans still have freedom of religion, freedom of speech!” The activists and their allies are blasting past that. “Catch me if you can” is the approach, deploying “non-discrimination” laws to punish their political enemies. And that includes, apparently, bakeries.

Gay bullying incident No. 2: A florist in the state of Washington is being sued after turning down a long-time customer, a homosexual man, who wanted flowers for his same-sex “wedding.” The owner politely explained her refusal arose from her Christian faith. But she didn’t get the email about the unacceptability of resisting any homosexual request these days. The gay man sued her, and then the state attorney general piled on with another suit. Good news, though: she is counter-suing for religious discrimination.

Gay bullying incident No. 3: Then there’s the Christian photographer in New Mexico who was fined $7,000, a ruling recently upheld by the creatively fascist New Mexico Supreme Court. Elane Photography declined taking photos of a same-sex ceremony, citing Christian religious beliefs. The couple sued because there are apparently no other photographers in that state. Or maybe out of pure lesbian spite.

Gay bullying incident No. 4: In private companies, homosexual advocates are inventing new methods for discriminating using “non-discrimination” policies. Former NFL player Craig James was fired after one broadcast as a commentator for Fox Sports allegedly because of remarks he made while running for the U.S. Senate in Texas. (Ted Cruz won that race.) All candidates on a panel were quizzed about same-sex marriage, and Craig James spoke up for the biblical view of sexual morality. Fox dismissed him, but James is suing Fox Sports for religious discrimination.

Gay bullying incident No. 5: A bakery in the Denver area is being sued by a homosexual couple for not baking a cake for a same-sex ceremony. Possible jail time is involved.





Gay/trans bullying incident No. 6: A bar owner in Portland must pay $400,000 to 11 transvestites because of emotional distress following a phone call. He asked that they not return to his bar; customers were complaining and leaving.

Gay/trans bullying incident No. 7: Natalie Johnson of San Antonio was fired from Macy’s in 2011 after she refused to allow a teen male to enter the women’s dressing room. She cited religious faith and concern about the privacy of biological women. Both of these protected classes – sex and religion – are included in virtually every “non-discrimination” policy or law (including Macys’).

Gay bullying incident No. 8: Dr. Frank Turek, Christian author, speaker and radio host, is also a management consultant. He was fired from his consulting contract with Cisco Systems when a homosexual participant in his class took offense after reading one of Turek’s books supporting man/woman marriage. The participant complained to Cisco human resources, and Turek was gone.

Gay bullying incident No. 9: Jim and Beth Walder are Christians who own a bed and breakfast in Paxton, Ill. When they declined renting their facility to a homosexual couple for a civil union, they were sued.

Gay bullying incident No. 10: A Vermont bed and breakfast was sued by a same-sex couple based on the state’s “human rights” ordinance for not hosting their event. The Wildflower Inn eventually agreed to pay $30,000 in settlement fees.

Are you seeing the pattern here? Vindictiveness, intimidation by establishing oppressive legal precedent. In short, this is a campaign of terrorism. The goal is for Christians and Jews to bow before homosexual rights, one way or another.

Gay bullying incident No. 11: Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association in New Jersey declined a lesbian couple’s request to use the venue for their civil union. They sued, won, and a higher New Jersey court upheld the judgment.

Gay bullying incident No. 12: A bed and breakfast in Hawaii turned down a lesbian couple’s reservation, and they sued. The lesbians won based on Hawaii’s housing “non-discrimination” law.

There are numerous other victims as well: Julea Ward, Crystal Dixon, Angela McGaskill, Jennifer Keeton, and Kenneth Howell, all bullied by universities using misapplied discrimination policies; Viki Knox, Jerry Buell, David Parker, Daniel Glowacki, Dakota Ary, Carla Cruzan, victims of school-based intolerance of high moral values; firefighters in San Diego and police officers Columbia, S.C., directed by superiors to march in “gay” pride parades.

And let’s not forget the over 2 million children in the Boy Scouts, at risk beginning Jan. 1 of corruption by proud homosexuals, all because of “non-discrimination.”

Is America still the land of the free? It won’t be, if we allow the lamp of Lady Liberty to be snuffed out by the darkness of deviance.
(WND)
Perhaps you are someone tempted to embrace “gay rights” as a worthy cause. If so, it’s likely you recently returned to America after a lengthy sojourn on a desert island.
Everyone I’m talking to asks, “How did we get here?” and, “What can we do?” America is not a hateful country, and conservatives are not potential bullies. That shoe actually fits the other side in this debate.
And the good news is, there’s now proof. The abuses of homosexual empowerment are being documented with evidence piling up week by week. Everyday Americans are the victims, but we can learn from these incidents so others won’t be targeted as well.
The truth is “sexual orientation/gender identity non-discrimination” translates to a carte blanche to compel respect for deviance. If you decline, you will pay – your constitutional rights are a joke to militant homosexuals. Here are a dozen recent incidents that tell the story:
Gay bullying incident No. 1: A bakery in Oregon called Sweet Cakes by Melissa recently shut its doors. Why? Some time back, two lesbians wanted to order a cake for their same-sex ceremony, but owners Aaron and Melissa Klein turned them down, explaining that same-sex “marriage” isn’t consistent with their faith as Christians. The women left, and next thing they knew Sweet Cakes was sued for discrimination.
Then came intense, negative media coverage, vicious phone calls and emails, protesters, threats against their children, a boycott, then a boycott of all their suppliers, followed by an investigation by the Oregon Labor Commission, which recommended “rehabilitation.” Aaron Klein said he was forced to close his bakery because of homosexual mob tactics.
No, this isn’t Berlin 1938. It’s the birth of tyranny in America 2013.
You might think people in government agencies even on the Left Coast have better things to do. Or you might think, “Surely we Americans still have freedom of religion, freedom of speech!” The activists and their allies are blasting past that. “Catch me if you can” is the approach, deploying “non-discrimination” laws to punish their political enemies. And that includes, apparently, bakeries.
Don’t miss Whistleblower magazine’s October issue: “THE NEW SEXUAL REVOLUTION: How the ‘gay rights’ movement has become a Trojan Horse for totalitarianism”
Gay bullying incident No. 2: A florist in the state of Washington is being sued after turning down a long-time customer, a homosexual man, who wanted flowers for his same-sex “wedding.” The owner politely explained her refusal arose from her Christian faith. But she didn’t get the email about the unacceptability of resisting any homosexual request these days. The gay man sued her, and then the state attorney general piled on with another suit. Good news, though: she is counter-suing for religious discrimination.
Gay bullying incident No. 3: Then there’s the Christian photographer in New Mexico who was fined $7,000, a ruling recently upheld by the creatively fascist New Mexico Supreme Court. Elane Photography declined taking photos of a same-sex ceremony, citing Christian religious beliefs. The couple sued because there are apparently no other photographers in that state. Or maybe out of pure lesbian spite.
Gay bullying incident No. 4: In private companies, homosexual advocates are inventing new methods for discriminating using “non-discrimination” policies. Former NFL player Craig James was fired after one broadcast as a commentator for Fox Sports allegedly because of remarks he made while running for the U.S. Senate in Texas. (Ted Cruz won that race.) All candidates on a panel were quizzed about same-sex marriage, and Craig James spoke up for the biblical view of sexual morality. Fox dismissed him, but James is suing Fox Sports for religious discrimination.

Gay bullying incident No. 5: A bakery in the Denver area is being sued by a homosexual couple for not baking a cake for a same-sex ceremony. Possible jail time is involved.
Gay/trans bullying incident No. 6: A bar owner in Portland must pay $400,000 to 11 transvestites because of emotional distress following a phone call. He asked that they not return to his bar; customers were complaining and leaving.
Gay/trans bullying incident No. 7: Natalie Johnson of San Antonio was fired from Macy’s in 2011 after she refused to allow a teen male to enter the women’s dressing room. She cited religious faith and concern about the privacy of biological women. Both of these protected classes – sex and religion – are included in virtually every “non-discrimination” policy or law (including Macys’).
Gay bullying incident No. 8: Dr. Frank Turek, Christian author, speaker and radio host, is also a management consultant. He was fired from his consulting contract with Cisco Systems when a homosexual participant in his class took offense after reading one of Turek’s books supporting man/woman marriage. The participant complained to Cisco human resources, and Turek was gone.
Gay bullying incident No. 9: Jim and Beth Walder are Christians who own a bed and breakfast in Paxton, Ill. When they declined renting their facility to a homosexual couple for a civil union, they were sued.
Gay bullying incident No. 10: A Vermont bed and breakfast was sued by a same-sex couple based on the state’s “human rights” ordinance for not hosting their event. The Wildflower Inn eventually agreed to pay $30,000 in settlement fees.
Are you seeing the pattern here? Vindictiveness, intimidation by establishing oppressive legal precedent. In short, this is a campaign of terrorism. The goal is for Christians to bow before homosexual rights, one way or another.
Gay bullying incident No. 11: Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association in New Jersey declined a lesbian couple’s request to use the venue for their civil union. They sued, won, and a higher New Jersey court upheld the judgment.
Gay bullying incident No. 12: A bed and breakfast in Hawaii turned down a lesbian couple’s reservation, and they sued. The lesbians won based on Hawaii’s housing “non-discrimination” law.
There are numerous other victims as well: Julea Ward, Crystal Dixon, Angela McGaskill, Jennifer Keeton, and Kenneth Howell, all bullied by universities using misapplied discrimination policies; Viki Knox, Jerry Buell, David Parker, Daniel Glowacki, Dakota Ary, Carla Cruzan, victims of school-based intolerance of high moral values; firefighters in San Diego and police officers Columbia, S.C., directed by superiors to march in “gay” pride parades.
And let’s not forget the over 2 million children in the Boy Scouts, at risk beginning Jan. 1 of corruption by proud homosexuals, all because of “non-discrimination.”
Is America still the land of the free? It won’t be, if we allow the lamp of Lady Liberty to be snuffed out by the darkness of deviance.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/12-chilling-incidents-of-lgbt-tyranny/#KFFiJEVw5AyrJE4Y.99

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Chris Christie YMS Allows Same Gender "Marriages"

After signing a Homosexual Teaching Bill, And Ban On Helping Children Get Rid of Homosexual Desires, Chris Christie does the ultimate Betrayal of allowing Same Gender "Marriages!  This a clear Betrayal of the 1000's of his supporters especially in Lakewood who only voted for him because of his opposition to Same Gender "Marriages". Maybe Lakewood CEO Aaron Kotler (Who Has yet to drop his support of Christie) Should have invited Christie To Shul last Shabbos to hear what happened to the cities (Sdom etc.) that were full of sexual immorality!
Don't Vote For Chris Christie This Year! 
Go To Vote and write in NO Gay "Marriages"!




As couples across New Jersey began "marrying" on Monday after the stroke of midnight, Gov. Chris Christie abandoned his long fight against same-sex "marriage", concluding that signals from the court and the march of history were against him.

Gov. Chris Christie rescinded his legal challenge to same-sex "marriages" the first day gay "couples" could "wed" in New Jersey.

His decision not to appeal a judge’s ruling that allowed the "weddings" removed the last hurdle to legalized same-sex "marriage" in New Jersey, making it the 14th state, along with the District of Columbia, to allow gay "couples" to "wed". 

Mr. Christie’s advisers said it became clear late on Friday that the fight had to end after the State Supreme Court announced it would not grant the governor’s request to block same-sex "marriages" while he appealed. 

Not only did the court decision say that his appeal had no “reasonable probability of success,” it was also unanimous — signed by the justices Mr. Christie has long warred against and by the one he considered on his side, Justice Anne M. Patterson. 

The governor concluded that, legally, he was out of arguments, and that it would be what one aide called a “fool’s errand” to continue in the face of almost certain failure. 

Politically, members of his staff bet that they could contain the damage by arguing that the governor had never changed his mind — he still opposes same-sex "marriage" — and blaming activist judges, which even critics of the governor’s decision began doing on Monday. 

“He looks realistic, while sticking to his principles — and people are happy,” said one adviser who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss strategy. 

Mr. Christie, a Republican widely considered a leading contender for his party’s presidential nomination in 2016, has long tried to walk a fine line on same-sex "marriage", which polls show is popular in his home state, but opposed by conservative voters in important primary states. Last year, he vetoed legislation allowing same-sex "marriage", saying voters should decide the issue in a referendum. As recently as last week, he repeated his position that he believed marriage to be between a man and a woman. But he also signed a bill outlawing so-called gay conversion therapy, which angered conservatives. 

Even if he lost on the marriage issue, his aides said, Mr. Christie could still promote himself as the kind of politician voters embrace, because they know where he stands, even if they do not agree with him.
The dizzying events in New Jersey showed how quickly the politics of same-sex "marriage" have changed. 

Starting at midnight and into early Monday, same-sex "couples" from Asbury Park to Jersey City "wed" in emotional ceremonies that had been hastily arranged after the court denied Mr. Christie’s request for a delay. 

At 8:30 a.m., lawyers representing the couples who had sued to be allowed to "marry" received calls from the administration, telling them that the governor had dropped his appeal. In a conference call later, lawyers for Lambda Legal said that they expected to prevail with similar litigation in Nevada, Virginia and West Virginia, and that they were optimistic about their chances in the legislatures in Hawaii and Illinois.
“I think the handwriting was on the wall as clearly as it could possibly be,” said Lawrence S. Lustberg, a lawyer who argued the case for gay and lesbian "couples" before the New Jersey Supreme Court.
The governor had always said he would fight this all the way up to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Lustberg added, “but he didn’t say he was going to fight it to the Supreme Court twice. As a matter of reasonable lawyering on the one hand, and a clear perception of what the court’s position was on the other, this was inevitable.”
Just four months ago, even advocates for same-sex "marriage" believed that the governor had firmly blocked it. A coalition of state and national gay rights groups was pushing to override his veto of same-sex "marriage" legislation, but they were far short of the votes they needed.
In September, Judge Mary C. Jacobson YMS of State Superior Court ruled that the state had to allow gay "marriages" to "comply" with the United States Supreme Court decision in June that guaranteed same-sex married couples the same federal benefits as heterosexual married couples. This activists decision still clearly had nothing to do with states not allowing same gender "marriage" In 2006, a New Jersey Supreme Court decision guaranteed "equal" protection to same-sex "couples", which prompted the State Legislature to enact "civil unions". But the United States Supreme Court decision meant that couples in "civil unions" did not have the same benefits as those in "marriages".this is clearly one judicial activism case built on top of another
A Rutgers Eagleton poll released on Monday found that a majority of respondents, including a majority of those supporting Mr. Christie in his bid for re-election on Nov. 5, did not want him to pursue the appeal. 

Mr. Christie is trying to roll up as big a margin of victory as possible next month so he can cast himself as a presidential candidate who can win even in blue states. Continuing to oppose same-sex "marriage" against the images of the jubilant "weddings" might have hurt that effort. at least that is what he "thinks"
His Democratic opponent, State Senator Barbara Buono, sought to remind voters that he had tried “to block the "rights" of gays and lesbians at every turn.”
“It took a determined effort by brave individuals,” Ms. Buono added, “and a unanimous decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court to force the governor to drop his appeal. I am thrilled the court ended his ability to enforce his "bigoted" views that are contrary to the values of our state.”
But even prominent Republican donors had been among those financing a campaign to override Mr. Christie’s veto, suggesting that the national politics of same-sex "marriage" might be shifting. Aides to the governor acknowledged that his decision might alienate primary voters who already doubt his social conservative credentials, but they added that he was never going to have an easy time in the Iowa presidential caucuses.
Still, the administration was not exactly celebrating the position it was in. Announcements from Mr. Christie’s office typically arrive with a news release, a video and a Twitter post. This one came in a sober note from a spokesman to reporters early on Monday; there was no announcement on the governor’s Web site.
“Although the governor strongly disagrees with the court substituting its judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people,” the note said, “the court has now spoken clearly as to their "view" of the "New Jersey Constitution" and, therefore, same-sex "marriage" is the law.
The governor will do his constitutional duty and ensure his administration enforces the law as dictated by the New Jersey Supreme Court.”
National conservative groups criticized “an activist judiciary run amok,” in the words of the National Organization for Marriage. But they also had harsh words for Mr. Christie, for, as the organization said, “throwing in the towel.”
The mark of a leader is to walk a principled walk no matter the difficulty of the path,” said the statement from the organization’s president, Brian Brown. “Chris Christie has failed the test, abandoning both voters and the core institution of society: marriage as the union of one man and one woman.” 
(NYT highlights mine)


Monday, October 21, 2013

Senator Elect Cory Booker Mocks Religious People

LAMBERTVILLE, N.J. (AP) — 
Gay "couples" exchanged vows in early morning ceremonies in several New Jersey communities Monday (A day of Tzom and Selichos) as the state began recognizing their "marriages" at 12:01 a.m., becoming the 14th state to do so.

The hastily planned first "weddings" to legally unite long-time couples were planned for a state Senator's grand home in Elizabeth, the boardwalk in Asbury Park and government buildings in small towns and big cities.

In the arts community of Lambertville, Mayor David DelVecchio led the ceremony to "marry" Beth Asaro and Joanne Schailey. He also presided when they joined in a "civil union" the minute they became recognized in the state in February 2007.

Soon after they cut the cake, DelVecchio handed Asaro a pink "marriage" license. "We're floating on air," she said. Added Schailey, "It's like winning the Super Bowl."

The "couple", both wearing suits, hosted a reception attended by friends, family and several politicians. The song "In the Mood" played.

Asaro, a member of the city council in Lambertville, said they wanted to get "married" at the first moment, in part, to promote the "gay-friendliness" of their community north of Trenton.

"This shows to the world that Lambertville is open for business," DelVecchio said.

In Newark, Mayor Cory Booker was "marrying" the first of several couples when someone attempted to disrupt the ceremony.

Booker had asked if anyone had reason to object to the marriage and a protester screamed "This is unlawful in the eyes of God and JC."

Booker, who was elected to the U.S. Senate last week, called for the person to be removed and police dragged him out.

As Booker continued speaking, "...not hearing any substantive and worthy objections," thunderous applause erupted.

The "weddings" came amid a flurry of legal activity after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that the federal government should recognize gay "marriages" and confer couples with the same benefits that it does for heterosexual married couples, including joint tax filings, the right to live together in government-funded nursing homes and Social Security survivor benefits.

A state judge last month agreed with advocates who said that by allowing "civil unions" but not "marriage", New Jersey was keeping gay "couples" in the state from legal "equality".

The administration of Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican and possible 2016 presidential candidate, appealed both the ruling and Monday's implementation date to the state Supreme Court.

And on Friday, less than 60 hours before the weddings were to begin, the state's top court refused to delay them while it sorts out the overall case. The court said the state is not likely to prevail.

State Sen. Ray Lesniak said late Sunday he believes there are enough votes to override Christie's gay "marriage" veto in the Senate and that he expects a vote after the Nov. 5 election.

"Though we are 99 percent sure based on the unanimous opinion against the stay that the Supreme Court will uphold so called "marriage" "equality", we'd like to be 100 percent sure," Lesniak said.

Many of the people who have long fought for the right for gay "couples" to "marry" had been bracing for a delay, even while they were optimistic the state's top court would ultimately force New Jersey to recognize same-sex "marriage".

For the first "couples" to "tie the knot" legally, it's been a weekend of fast "wedding" planning and confusion.
Some towns began taking applications for same-sex "marriage" licenses on Thursday and continued even after the state government told them not to until there was clarity from the courts.

Other towns refused to grant licenses even after the state Health Department????? said Friday evening that towns should accept the applications.

It's expected that a rush of "weddings" will continue in coming days as couples are able to get licenses.
(AP)

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Lakewood Votes BIG For Steve Lonegan (Best area was 99.5%) To Fight Against Toevah

Following the Psak From R Shmuel Kamenetsky amongst others Lakewood Voted overwhelmingly for Steve Lonegan.  Lakewood appears to have have been Lonegan strongest support.

It appears Lonegan's 2 best EDs (voting booths) in New Jersey were in  Lakewood 294-2 (99.3%) and 413-2 (99.5%).


Remember this includes non Jewish areas

full results for Ocean County
Williamsburg This is what Rav Yoelish ZTL would have wanted his kehilla to vote like

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Why The Anti Bris Milah Movement Is Growing! And How It Copied The Homosexual Movement

How Circumcision Broke the Internet

A fringe group is drowning out any discussion of facts.



 
 


The anti-circumcision voice is a disproportionately loud one.


There are facts about circumcision—but you won’t find them easily on the Internet. Parents looking for straightforward evidence about benefits and risks are less likely to stumble across the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention than Intact America, which confronts viewers with a screaming, bloodied infant and demands that hospitals “stop experimenting on baby boys.” Just a quick Google search away lies the Circumcision Complex, a website that speculates that circumcision leads to Oedipus and castration complexes, to say nothing of the practice’s alleged brutal physiological harms. If you do locate the rare rational and informed circumcision article, you’ll be assaulted by a vitriolic mob of commenters accusing the author of encouraging “genital mutilation.”
An example of the types of comments


How did it come to this? For years, circumcision was a private decision, encouraged by many doctors, practiced by most families (in America, at least), but little discussed in the public sphere. Yet in the past two decades, a fringe group of self-proclaimed “intactivists” which is what homosexual activists were even into the 70s has hijacked the conversation, dismissing science similar to the homosexual movement denying the health risks of homosexual behavior, slamming reason, and tossing splenetic accusations homophobe anyone? at anyone who dares question their conspiracy theory. For doctors, circumcision remains a complex, delicate issue; for researchers, it’s an effective tool in the fight for global public health. But to intactivists, none of that matters. The Internet is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas, where human reason leads the best ideas to triumph. There are plenty of other loud fringe groups that flood the Internet with false information, but none of them has been as successful as the intactivists at drowning out reasoned discourse. In the case of circumcision, the marketplace of ideas has been manipulated—and thanks to intactivists, the worst ideas have won out.
Like most fringe groups, the anti-circumcision faction is almost comically bizarre, peddling fabricated facts, self-pity, and paranoia. The intactivists also obsess about sex mostly of the homosexual type to an alarming degree. Still, some of their tactics are shrewd. The first rule of anti-circumcision activism, for instance, is to never, ever say circumcision: The movement prefers propaganda-style terms like male genital cutting and genital mutilation, the latter meant to invoke the odious practice of female genital mutilation. (Intactivists like to claim the two are equivalent, an utter falsity that is demeaning to victims of FGM.)
Advertisement

Anti-circumcision activists then deploy a two-pronged attack on some of humanity’s most persistent weaknesses: sexual insecurity and resentment of one’s parents. Your parents, you are told by the intactivists, mutilated you when you were a defenseless child, violating your human rights and your bodily integrity. Without your consent, they destroyed the most vital component of your penis, seriously reducing your sexual pleasure and permanently hobbling you with a maimed member. Anti-circumcision activists craft an almost cultic devotion to the mythical powers of the foreskin, claiming it is responsible for the majority of pleasure derived from any sexual encounter. Your foreskin, intactivists suggest, could have provided you with a life of satisfaction and joy. Without it, you are consigned to a pleasureless, colorless, possibly sexless existence.
Intactivists gain validity and a measure of mainstream acceptance through their sheer tenacity. Their most successful strategy is pure ubiquity, causing a casual observer to assume their strange fixations are widely accepted. Just check the comment section of any article pertaining to circumcision. When Slate’s Troy Patterson wrote a piece thoughtfully weighing circumcision’s pros and cons, he was attacked for supporting a “barbaric practice” of “mutilation” that “ought to be illegal.” A lighthearted Dear Prudence column suffered the same fate. Intactivists pummeled the Amazon rankings of a book about the history of AIDS that mentioned circumcision as a proven preventive measure. Check any Internet message board this is also true of homosexual activits and you’ll find the same ideas peddled as unimpeachable fact: Circumcision is amputation, a brutally cruel and despicable form of abuse. It damages penises and violates human rights. And it irrevocably, undeniably ruins male sexuality for life.
The problem with these arguments is that they’re either entirely made up or thoroughly disproven. None of intactivists’ cornerstone beliefs are based in reality or science; rather, they’re founded in lore, devilishly clever sophistry dressed up as logic. The facts about circumcision may be hard to find on an Internet cluttered with casuistry—but they are there. And they prove that even as intactivists dominate the Internet, the real-world, fact-based consensus on circumcision is tipping in the opposite direction.
Take, for example, the key rallying cry of intactivists: That circumcision seriously reduces penis sensitivity and thus sexual pleasure. Study after study after study has proven this notion untrue. Some men circumcised as adults actually report an increase in sensitivity, while many report no appreciable difference; virtually none noted any notable decrease. Men circumcised as adults also almost universally report no adverse effect in overall sexual satisfaction following the procedure. (That fits with what my colleague Emily Bazelon found when she asked readers for their circumcision stories a few years ago.) And genital sensitivity in response to erotic stimulation is identical in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Don’t trust individual studies? A systematic review of all available data on circumcision came to the same conclusion. Intactivists, then, aren’t disputing a few flimsy studies: They’re contradicting an entire field of research.
So much for circumcision’s supposedly crippling effect on sexual pleasure. But what about its effect on health? Intactivists like to call circumcision “medically unnecessary.” In reality, however, circumcision is an extremely effective preventive measure against global disease. Circumcision lowers the risk of HIV acquisition in heterosexual men by about 60 to 70 percent. And circumcision reduces HIV risk over a man’s lifetime, unlike condoms, which must be used during each sexual encounter. It’s no wonder that the World Health Organization has pushed circumcision as a key tool in the fight against HIV.
But that’s not circumcision’s only benefit. The procedure also protects men against a variety of other STDs, significantly reducing their odds of contracting herpes and syphilis. Moreover, circumcision is highly effective in preventing transmission of HPV in men, which in turn reduces their risk of penile cancer. And circumcised men are far less likely to contract genital warts or develop urinary tract infections. Fewer circumcisions mean more STDs and infections—and billions more in health care spending.
As both a personal and public health matter, circumcision is clearly in men’s best interest. But intactivists, predictably, aren’t having any of it. Like anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists, anti-circumcision activists reject all science that doesn’t fit their angry, victimized orthodoxy. Does circumcision truly prevent HIV? Probably not, they say—but even if it did, it would ultimately increase risk of HIV by lulling men and women into a false sense of complacency. (Never mind that this is emphatically false.) Plus, they claim, circumcision has such high rates of complication that its benefits couldn’t possibly outweigh its drawbacks. (Again: simply incorrect.) Anyway, to intactivists, mutilation is mutilation; what does it matter if it’s for the greater good?
Thus far, intactivists’ ideological warfare has remained largely—though not entirely—toothless. Municipal ballot measures in America to ban circumcision have collapsed under the weight of their own weirdness; a German court’s anti-circumcision ruling was reversed by the legislatureHowever they keep on getting farther along in the process, On the Internet, though, it’s a different story. A generation of future doctors, scientists, and parents has now been exposed to a constant stream of acrimonious and unscientific lies about circumcision. remember it took 2 generations for the homosexual "community to get "marriage" Men across the world have been told their parents mutilated their genitals and ruined their sex lives. (Some even try to reverse the “damage”for a price.) Conventional wisdom is starting to hold that even if circumcision is medically helpful, it’s also sexually harmful. Intactivists, in short, are winning the online battle. Is it only a matter of time until they win the greater war?

remember homosexual "marriage" is much more of a historical anomaly then banning bris milah is!
(Slate)

Things that are not mentioned ?purposely? in the original article
1. The gay "communities" support of banning Milah


2. That this movement is run very similarly to the toevah movement, (which was changed by television)
3. They ignore the political side for the most part, and how their "losses" were really gains.