Defending the family

Share on MeWe Share on Gab E-mail article

'Illegal Meeting' Used by Gay Lobby to Manipulate Vote in St. Patrick's Day Parade

The Dorchester Reporter reports;

A breakthrough in the decades-long impasse over the South Boston St. Patrick's Day Parade organizers' exclusion of gay and lesbian marchers appears to have been reached on Monday night after a petition by the LGBT veterans organization OUTVETS to march in next year's parade was approved by a committee of South Boston veterans by a 5-4 vote.

However, at least one member of the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council is disputing the vote's validity, charging that the full membership of the committee was not on hand for the decision.

"The Supreme Court decision in 1994 still stands," said Philip J. Wuschke Jr., a past commander of the council who is on the committee and attended last night's meeting. "There will be no sexual contents in the parade and that's where it stands." Wuschke contends that there was no quorum at Monday's meeting and because not all members had been notified, it was "an illegal meeting."

For his part, Wuschke said he expected that those in dissent would consult with John "Wacko" Hurley, the Veterans Council's lawyer. Hurley, the longtime council leader who championed the veterans' position to deny gay groups entry into the parade in the 1990s, was not present at Monday meeting. He told the Reporter that he was sick and missed his first meeting in 50 years.

Read the full story here;

Mass Resistance is Reporting;

Wuschke portrayed the meeting and subsequent vote as an outrageous effort to manipulate the vote and exclude the clear wishes of the majority of the committee. According to Wuschke:

  • Meeting date changed. The meeting was originally scheduled for Tuesday. But four or five days beforehand it was suddenly moved to Monday. And the mailed notification of the change only reached some of the members.

  • Members not notified about vote. Members were not notified that the vote on OUTVETS would be taking place at that meeting.

Wuschke also pointed out that the 5-4 vote was not technically legal because only nine members were in attendance, but an official quorum requires 12 members. In addition, he said, the bylaws specifically prohibit any group from marching that identifies itself by its sexuality, or carries signs or banners that do so.

Read the full story here;