Mitt Romney is completely unacceptable

posted May 9, 2012, 2:25 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 9, 2012, 2:25 AM ]

Mitt Romney's Deception
Paul Madore and I wish to be absolutely clear about the looming threat of a presidential campaign by the former Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.  Conscience dictates that we cannot ever vote for, or support, a Romney candidacy.

It is well documented that Mitt Romney launched homosexual marriage in New England.  He made Massachusetts the first state in America to endorse this evil.  

By a one vote margin the Supreme Court gave the Massachusetts legislature six months to stop "discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation" with respect to the benefits of civil marriage.  Before the clock ran out on the legislature Romney ordered the clerks to change the forms that citizens fill out when they seek a marriage license.  Homosexuals rushed to fill out the new forms, and Massachusetts became the first state in America to endorse sodomy based marriage.

His history of flip flops on this, and many other issues, forbids serious consideration of his candidacy.

Amy Contrada, author of the book, Mitt Romney's Deception: His Stealth Promotion of 'Gay Rights' and 'Gay Marriage' in Massachusetts" will speak at our conference on June 9th in Lewiston.  Come and learn about the source of the profound social and moral shifts that are destroying our nation.

Learn more about our June conference here.

Americans in the south overwhelmingly reject special rights

posted May 9, 2012, 1:45 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 9, 2012, 1:45 AM ]

Map of North Carolina
Yesterday the citizens of North Carolina overwhelmingly rejected special rights.  At issue was the special right of so-called "same sex marriage."  Individuals who believe sodomy should be a legal right want marriage redefined.  They want to provide the historic civil and economic benefits of marriage (designed to honor and protect couples who enter into a life-long contract for the sake of the next generation) to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders and queers.

61 percent of voters said they want marriage to refer only to one man and one woman relationships.  It is unclear whether this means the laws and policies of North Carolina will allow for the counterfeits of "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships."  And this vote does nothing to fix the problems related to so-called "hate crimes" and the hyper-politicized sexual orientation movement that is metastasizing throughout the church and culture.

Now it is likely that the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) will set its sights on Maine.  Emboldened by this impressive victory Brian Brown, the leader of NOM, will come to Maine with millions of dollars and preach that, "This campaign is not about the morality of homosexuality."

Maine is NOT North Carolina.  He and the Christian Civic League of Maine used the "it's not about morality" strategy in 2009.  They got only 53 percent of the vote.  Polling shows the issue moving away from us since 2009.  Homosexual activists and their allies (and they are legion in Maine) gathered over 100,000 signatures to force this issue to the ballot.  They have effectively silenced all political opposition to their redefinition of marriage campaign.  Even the Maine Republican Party was silent on it when they gathered in Augusta this past weekend.

Most evangelical pastors I know have voluntarily silenced themselves on this issue for fear of offending people in their congregations.  Please don't think that just because your pastor condemns the sin of homosexuality from the pulpit when this issue works some of us into a froth during election time that he is helping.  The only way we are going to right this very deep and threatening wrong that has been done to the society, and that is now being done to Christianity, is for our leaders to fight this evil throughout the year.  They must do so in no uncertain terms.  They must do so unequivocally.

We are inviting the very courageous Scott Lively to Maine for the weekend of June 8,9 and 10.  I doubt very much if we will find a church that has the courage to invite him to preach on Sunday morning.  Please, please ... please prove me wrong.

NOM worked overtime to silence Peter LaBarbera in 2009.  They put so much pressure on me when I was leader of the Christian Civic League of Maine NOT TO BRING PETER TO MAINE that I ultimately resigned in frustration over it.

Paul Madore and I will increase the ferocity and determination of our attack on this evil movement even if we are the only two men left who are willing to do it.

It really is that important.  And -- make no mistake -- it is about the morality of homosexuality.

-- Mike Heath

We were it

posted May 7, 2012, 2:18 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 7, 2012, 1:10 PM ]

Maine Republican Convention
While the Ron Paul movement took over the Maine Republican Convention this weekend, evidence of concern about the bulldozing of morality by the hyper-politicized and mega-networked special rights movement was nowhere to be seen.  

The combination of rabid secular libertarianism of the Ron Paul movement, and sensitivity to pop culture of the Republican establishment, forced the deep concerns of Christian people so far into the background that they weren't even mentioned by Maine's Tea Party Governor during his speech.  Maine's Roman Catholic Bishop has promised not to campaign against sodomy based "marriage."  The Protestant evangelical movement has been stepping back from the bleeding edge on this issue for the past ten to fifteen years.

The only evidence of concern over the onrushing tsunami of sodomy based "marriage" was one thousand post cards that this PAC handed out as delegates arrived at the convention.  Maine votes on the vile issue in November.  Over 100,000 citizens signed petitions indicating they want to vote.

When these petition signers realize they were duped into signing a petition that virtually guarantees their children and grandchildren will be taught that sexual perversion is normal by both pop culture and the schools they will reject the proposal by a wide margin.

Since the Republicans won't talk about this issue anymore we wonder what the Democrats will do at their upcoming convention.

What the national pro family groups must do next

posted May 1, 2012, 3:11 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 1, 2012, 4:31 AM ]

Mike Heath
There has been a great deal of angst expressed by insiders over the past few weeks over the failure of national pro family groups to be clear about what is at stake in this Maine debate.  Paul Madore and I understand that Maine will continue to lose this issue if national groups are allowed to promote absurd, politically correct ideas like, "This campaign is not about the morality of homosexuality."  That only confuses the public, and sounds like it came out of the "gay" rights playbook.  That statement, by the way, is from Brian Brown.  He is the leader of the National Organization for Marriage.  He will be funding the Christian Civic League of Maine's new political action committee called "Protect Marriage Maine."

Paul Madore and I have talked at length about this matter.  We have prayed about it.

We've decided that all the pro family groups, state and national, need to fund the No Special Rights PAC.  This is not to say that they should not fund other groups or efforts aimed at a NO vote.  We are, however, absolutely convinced of the fact that they must fund this PAC if they really care about winning.

Here is why:
  1. We won the largest ever margin on this issue in a ballot fight in Lewiston in 1991.  We earned a 67 percent vote.  It was less a debate than it was a rumble.  And that is what is needed here -- a political fight -- not a discussion.  As my good friend Paul Madore has promised, "The gloves are off."
  2. Paul and I have been in the leadership trenches at a deeper level of involvement and hard work on this issue longer than anybody else in Maine.  We know what we are doing.  With all due respect to Brian Brown, Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council this is our home.  We will protect it with their help, and in no other way.
  3. We have led every statewide campaign on this issue going back to 1990.  The coalition that took over in 2009 consisted of late-comers, and groups with a demonstrated history of compromise on this issue.
  4. Maine people don't want to compromise on this issue.  They are offended that they are being cast as bigots if they don't agree with the high-pressure homosexual agenda.  More and more Mainers are silencing themselves for fear of being called a "bully" for believing that sex outside of marriage is morally repugnant.  This effort to divide the people of Maine must stop.  We are calling out the bullies.  They've kicked sand in the wrong face.
  5. We want to end the debate.  These other groups profit from the issue.  Their staff are well paid and they have big bills to pay.  An end to the debate doesn't serve their bottom line.  When was the last time you heard them promise to end the debate?  Shoot, I was on their payroll for over two decades.  I rarely, if ever, said it.
  6. Support for this PAC does not preclude them from funding the nicer than Jesus message that puts the focus on defending only the word marriage while surrendering on all the other demands of the "gay" rights movement.
If the National Organization for Marriage and it's allies will not fund our PAC we respectfully invite them to "invest" their money in some other state.  We don't need their "this isn't about morality" message dividing our side of the issue.

We plan on ending this "debate" this year in Maine.

As Maine goes, so goes the nation.

Help needed to inform the public about these groups

posted May 1, 2012, 2:43 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 1, 2012, 2:43 AM ]

sponsors of the sodomy campaign
If you click on this image you will open up a window on your computer to the sodomy crowd's website.  Bottom left of that website you will see the graphic I've embedded here.  You can click on each individual logo on their website and learn more about each of the sponsors.

We must inform the people of Maine about these groups before November.

A couple groups stood out to me immediately as worthy of immediate consideration.  The NASW brings social workers together.  Surely there are Christian social workers in Maine who think sodomy based "marriage" is wrong?

The other organization that I noticed immediately is the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence.  Putting an innocent child in a sodomy-practicing home is -- by any definition -- domestic violence.  It's the worst possible kind of domestic violence.

Most of the other groups are hard left organizations that need to be exposed to the public.  We are going to start that process in a big way on June 9th with Peter LaBarbera.  He is the nation's foremost expert on these radical groups.

If you have information on these groups that would be helpful to the public please email it to me at

Sodomy advocates attempt to redefine the word "freedom"

posted May 1, 2012, 2:15 AM by Michael S. Heath   [ updated May 1, 2012, 2:21 AM ]

no freedom
I've smudged out the word freedom in this graphic taken from the webpage of the forces pushing sodomy acceptance on Maine.

It is important for Maine people to understand that this movement has nothing to do with freedom.  It is all about changing the definition of words.  We will be writing about that extensively on this website, God willing.

They -- as everyone knows -- started by stealing the good word "gay."  They reasoned that the public could be fooled into thinking of homosexuality as a "gay" condition because homosexuals are creative and smart people.  Over decades of using the carrot and the stick they've herded many people into believing this lie.

They are creative and smart people.  That isn't the lie.

The lie is that they are happy, satisfied, full of joy and mirth.  They are the most vicious and hateful people I've ever dealt with in my life.  And we all know it, if we'd take half-a-minute to turn off the boob tube and think.

The advocates of sodomy based relationships are the furthest thing from "gay" I've ever encountered.

I digress.  This article is about freedom.

They argue that society will be more free if the civil institution of marriage is opened up to include citizens who love sodomy more than life itself.  Is this true?  Will society be more free, or less free, if marriage is redefined in this way?  I will argue that it will be less free.  This political process of redefinition is, in fact, already silencing Christians, Jews, Muslims ... indeed all Americans who object to so-called same sex "marriage."

First, we must ask ourselves, "What is sodomy?"  Most of us think of it as vile and unspeakable.  So, we won't go there.

For the purposes of this campaign I will argue that sodomy is the improper use of the God-given biological instruments of sex for the purpose of pleasure.  Essentially, sodomy is making pleasure the object of sex.  I realize this is over broad.  I will, however, argue that it is not too much of a stretch.

Marriage will always be what it is, no matter how the society chooses to define it.  Marriage is a lifetime commitment to someone of the opposite gender for the purpose of creating multi-generational bonds of blood.  No amount of politiking and legal jibber jabber is going to change that.  This proper definition is written on the heart of every lesbian and "gay" man on the planet.  It is hard-wired into the DNA of humanity.

The reason freedom is destroyed by this movement is because it succeeds by separating humanity from itself -- it breaks hearts in two and creates the need for force to maintain order.

This is becoming obvious to more and more Americans everyday.

It is loving for a government to make people free to pay the price for their sins.  It is tyranny to say there is no such thing as sin.  Sex outside the bonds of holy matrimony is a sin -- it is immoral, evil and wrong.  A society that does not maintain and enforce this law of nature and nature's God will die.  It is only a matter of time.

There is such a thing as the "freedom to marry."  Every citizen is free to marry someone of the opposite gender. It is not freedom to say that every man is free to marry every other man.  That is just weird.  And the consequence of creating such a "freedom" is obvious -- it will lead to much hurt, pain and social unrest over time.

You can see that already with the growing ferocity of atheist ideals in connection with this heart-breaking definition of freedom.  Christians are routinely discriminated against now.  They are ostracized, fired and ridiculed.  And all of this is carried off in the name of tolerance.

That is a subject for another article ... tolerance.

1-6 of 6