Orthophobia and the Marginalized QTBGL Catholic, or Catholics Coming Out.

It’s time to stop the hate and marginalization:

Orthophobia and the Marginalized QTBGL Catholic

As I survey the current state of the Catholic Church, I believe I can no longer hold back. It is time for me to come out.

I am and have for some time identified as a member of the QTBGL community, and I need to explain why I call myself a QTBGL Catholic.

For those who may not know, “QTBGL” stands for “Quietly Totally Believing God’s Law” and is sometimes referred to more simply as “TBGL” (just Totally Believing God’s Law). Personally, I think the “Q” is an essential aspect of our community, since it’s important to recognize just how quietly we go about totally believing the fullness of truth of the Catholic faith in our daily lives.

Coming out at this moment is vitally important. Not only do I need to be utterly honest about who I really am, but the Church needs to do a better job ministering to the QTBGL Catholic in the pew, not to mention QTBGL clergy in the Church, like me. We are marginalized, unjustly discriminated against, and regularly face demeaning “orthophobia” (irrational hate for, and fear of, right-thinking Christians) not only from fellow Catholics but even from secular society.

The level of orthophobia is getting worse, in fact. Within the Church, we are called “haters” and “bigots” simply for accepting and affirming what the Church actually teaches us about liturgy, justice, virtue, and, of course, the human person and sexuality (natural law). Outside the Church, orthophobes everywhere are trying to curtail our religious liberty, take away our conscience rights, and subject us to ridicule and hate simply because of who we really are.

Yet many QTBGL Catholics really feel as though we were born this way. Or at least baptized this way. Even in the face of such orthophobic animosity and outright discrimination (some of us have even lost jobs after publicly coming out as QTBGL), we know we are being true to ourselves. We are resigned to a rather lonely life of quietly accepting each and every truth taught to us by the Church, often at great personal cost.

You may have heard that recently a bishop was heartlessly attacked by orthophobes for his faithful interpretation of canon law as it applies to reception of Holy Communion and to funerals. While this bishop has not overtly come out as a QTBGL Catholic, orthophobes everywhere treated him that way. He was vilified horribly, even threatened.

Despite this bishop’s brave example, however, we need to face it—QTBGL Catholics are under attack and often feel alienated from so many other leaders of the Church who are supposed to welcome, affirm, and accompany us with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

Just think of how very few QTBGL-affirming parishes there really are in our local dioceses. When was the last time you saw a parish intentionally advertise something like, “At St. Fidelis Parish, ALL are really welcome—including QTBGL Catholics. Come as you are. Who am I to judge?”

It just doesn’t happen often enough. Sure, there may be some parishes that do what they can to minister to members of the QTBGL community and help us feel accepted for who we are. But more often than not, especially at the diocesan level, our needs are largely rejected and ignored.

For example, do our Church and parish leaders really not know the disheartening and isolating double standard that so many QTBGL Catholics experience? Too often, our leaders devote lots of time and energy ministering to orthophobic Catholics who reject us, offering them lavish attention, welcome, affirmation, and acceptance. Yet, many of these same leaders never seem to get around to teaching the orthophobic Catholics all those truths that we QTBGL persons accept unreservedly. We certainly don’t feel very respected in such unwelcoming parish environments.

My QTBGL community is starving for the nourishment that can only come from our pastoral ministers. It’s like a dagger in the hearts of marginalized QTBGL Catholics to know that we ourselves may rarely hear the fullness of truth in our parishes. But more than that, many of us “out” members of the QTBGL community have great concerns that orthophobic Catholics are not hearing those truths either. Often, when we approach parish and diocesan leaders with our concerns, mostly we are ignored outright—never hearing a word of affirmation or comfort. I can’t tell you how many times QTBGL Catholics have phoned or written their dioceses to ask for support when orthophobia rears its ugly head in our local parishes and even in our schools.

When we get no response, how can such silence be construed as respect, compassion, and sensitivity? How can it not be construed as a form of unjust discrimination against QTBGL Catholics?

By coming out, I am hoping to contribute to a culture of authentic “bridge building,” so to speak, between the institutional Church and the QTBGL community. And, I must say, the onus is really on the Church to take the first steps to eradicate orthophobia in all its forms and to reassure the QTBGL Catholic that, yes, we have just as much right to be part of the Church as even the pope does. QTBGL Catholics have real gifts to offer. We need to be permitted to share our God-given gifts. Particularly, our total acceptance of the truth is a great gift to the Church. Why don’t we hear this affirmed more in our churches?

Oddly, it’s a bit like the parable of the shepherd who goes after the one sheep but, in a twist of the parable, takes absolutely no precautions to meet the needs of the other 99 sheep while he is busy seeking and finding that one lost lamb. What shepherd, while seeking the one lost ewe, leaves 99 without food, water, protection, and guidance? What shepherd, after finding the lost sheep, brings it back and spends a huge amount of time caring for it while ignoring the requests and needs of the other 99? Such a shepherd might say to that one lost sheep, “You know, it’s okay if you still want to identify as a ‘lost sheep’; I don’t want to make you feel unwelcome or judged just because you have no real interest in thinking of yourself as ‘found’ like these other 99.”

In the fractured parable I’ve penned, when the 99 see how little value the shepherd seems to place on staying “found,” they might feel a bit underappreciated.

With these things in mind, my coming out as a QTBGL Catholic will also help combat the “erasure” our community has experienced for too long. We exist. We are out. We’re in every parish, every pew. QTBGL pride should be proclaimed in every parish community.

I can’t begin to say what a relief it is to finally come out and embrace my QTBGL identity.

Just one more thing—maybe we could come up with a QTBGL-pride flag to inspire us. I mean, I think we have a real shot at eradicating orthophobia, even in my lifetime. But we will need the cooperation of all Catholics, and all Catholic leaders. Until then, those who do make the brave choice to minister to QTBGL Catholics and our families will likely face hate, persecution, discrimination, and outright rejection.

Even so, I’ve heard from those ministering to the QTBGL community that all the hateful comments they endure from orthophobic Catholics seem like nothing after meeting just one QTBGL person or parent who says “thank you.”

And so—as a newly out QTBGL Catholic, on behalf of our community, I say to all who choose to minister to our pastoral needs:

Thank you.

Editor’s note: Pictured above is a detail from “Holy C0mmunion” painted by Ariel Agemian.

Written transcript of Bishop Gaydos’ May 9th priests Transgender Process meeting, with highlighted sections for quick reading.

Here is a full transcript of the audio we posted from the May 9th meeting where the chancery staff presented their 17 page revolutionary document to the priests of the Jefferson City Diocese.     Audio Transcript PDF

It’s a fairly quick read and you should first zip through and read the highlighted sentences.  They contradict what Fr. Joe Corel and the rest of the staff have since been telling the public and the priests.  If you have heard from your priest that Fr. Corel told him that they would make conditions so that enrollment of a transgender student or a student from an unnatural family would almost never happen, then please read these excerpts below.  It depends on who Fr. Corel is talking to and when, it depends on whether you are clergy on the one hand or just a parent or lay person on the other hand.

“We hope that you will know that in conjunction with Pope Francis trying to have us be inclusive, with our bishop encouraging us to be inclusive, that whenever possible we like to enroll children that have this situation because we feel like it’s a good way for evangelization, for including them in the Church. However, no is
also an option.”

” So consider the scenario and the communities who will be impacted. In a minute we will talk a little bit more about communities who will be impacted. When you enroll a student in your school, it’s not just that student that’s impacted. That student’s family is impacted. All the students in the class that that student will be enrolled in are impacted, and the student’s family is impacted and because our parishes support our schools as ministries, every member of your parish could possibly be impacted by
this decision. So it’s important for you to consider all of those folks. Then the determination would be, is this parish school a welcoming environment at this time, where this child will be and feel safe and secure  and know that they are loved, and is it in the best interest of this child to enroll them at this time in your school?”

And yet:

“If you enroll that child then the next steps will be to identify appropriate communities that have a need to know or a right to know about this agreement. Who needs to know this child is gay? Who needs to know that this is a transgender student? And we’re going to talk about how that works. We’re going to talk about what are those communities.”

They’ll condescend to consider everyone in the parish but weren’t planning to inform them.  This is a clerical arrogance that should have died in 2002.  It’s quite the opposite of what they think, the parents need to know what these people are up to.  At a later date we will show you statistics that reveal how they have lead the decline of the Diocese and failed to earn the right to conceal information about anything they do.  For starters, having just lost 3 seminarians, this Diocese now has 3 seminarians.   That’s in every grade of college and Theology.  Fr. Joe Corel was, from 2006 until recently, the Vocations Director for the Diocese.  For a comparison the mostly rural, blue collar Diocese of Wichita Kansas ordained 10 men this year and will ordain 10 next year.

The trouble with lies and coverups, or the Bishop’s $25 Million question.

The trouble with lies is that they breed BIGGER lies and BIGGER lies are harder to control than little lies.  A transcript of the presentation to priests of the 17 page transgender revolutionary process is almost finished.  We will soon publish it in full.  Keep in mind that this Diocese was the center of the clerical child abuse scandal and that according to investigators 80 percent of cases involving sexual abuse by clergymen reported in the U.S.A. were cases of ephebophilia, which is a perversion consisting in adult homosexual men being attracted not to children, but to pubescent and adolescent boys.  This not to slander all priests or all Gay men, in fact even the Church’s most gay friendly order, the Jesuits,  were only considered to be 30% homosexual.  Rather recent history shows that if a Bishop, priests, and nuns start a process that allows individual priests to determine what happens to LGBT children, transgender children, or the children of LGBT couples then maybe some red flags should go up and transparency should be demanded.   We say this to all parents and children of every state in life.  Pause to think about what is happening even if you think this process advances your agenda.  Children are at the mercy of adults in many ways, think back to times you were at the mercy of adult decisions or exposed to things that were unjust and how you would have chosen differently had you been an adult.  This is about leaders making decisions about innocent and powerless little people, about leaders making those decisions without the input of those who have actually lived with and raised innocent little people.

Sister Julie, Sister Elizabeth, Millie Aulbur, John DeLaporte, and Nancy Hoey don’t have to face congregations of parents.  They can hide out in their offices refusing to answer phone calls or return voicemails.  But Fr. Joe Corel, Monsignor Macarawicz, and Father Joshua Duncan have had to confront Catholic School parents.  This message is for everyone who has spoken to or will speak to these priests.  The transcript will show that Fr. Joe Corel was very enthusiastic in his support for the “process” and we have no reason to doubt him after he threatened Fr. Frank, something Fr. Corel has never publicly denied.  But Monsignor Macarawicz and Father Joshua Duncan were invited to the “summit” by Fr. Joe Corel and according to Sister Julie Brandt they were at several meetings last fall: “I think everyone said yes to your invitation.”  Both signed off on the 17 page document and neither has publicly denied attending or signing.  If these two priests tell you anything other than that they attended the summit meetings and then signed off on the document then they are implying that Sister Julie is telling a BIG lie and slandering two priests in the process.  If they tell you that they attended no meetings and had no input on the document then they are telling you that they know Sister Julie lied about them and yet they choose to say nothing.  So which one is it gentlemen?  Is she telling the truth about your support for the enrollment of transgender students or are you hiding the truth about her lie?  After all the child abuse that was covered up in this Diocese for decades it’s time for transparency and a little bit of spine.  You chose a vocation that puts you in contact with children and causes you to hear their confessions, you must live the higher standard you preach to them no matter how terrified you are of your boss.  We reason, taking your professed religion to it’s logical conclusion and watching you make the sign of the cross at mass, a sign of a torturous instrument of suffering, that since you signed off on this document it’s going to either be your emotional suffering in telling the truth now or the suffering of the children affected now and yours in the afterlife you profess to believe in.  Own the religion that demands its adherents work hard to pay your salary.

A good question for Sister Julie is, when exactly were these meetings?  Or, where did they take place?  On what dates?  What times?  Who was present at each meeting?  Who has the minutes?  Certainly you kept minutes on meetings about something that could affect thousands of local school children, right?  Something that some feminists consider criminalSomething that the American College of Pediatricians considers to be child abuse.   As a reminder, the people who pay your salary may wish to know before donating again.

Here is the full quote from the meeting:

“Sister Julie:  One of the things within that document that really encouraged dioceses to do was to hold a summit to have a conversation at an upper level to talk about this issue and these concerns and so Father Joe sent an email to many of us and said you’re invited to this summit. We need your service on this ad hoc committee and the people that were invited to that particular meeting– I think everyone said yes to your invitation. Millie Aulbur who is the chair of our diocesan education council.  She also is a lawyer here in town and has been a teacher as well, myself and Sister Elizabeth representing the Catholic school office, John DeLaporte with Youth ministry, Father Josh Duncan was invited as he’s an associate pastor here at Cathedral. He was invited because of his most recent theology training that addressed some of these issues and then also Nancy Hoey who is here up front with us and Nancy is a licensed practical counselor with Grace counseling and she serves as an advisor consultant for our Catholic schools and for the diocese in many ways.  And Monsignor Macarawicz was also invited to be a part of this committee because of his specialization in moral theology. And so that was the group that came together.  We had several meetings throughout this Fall looking at these issues.”

On a lighter note,  we are supposed to believe Sister Julie who told KRCG 13 that “the chancery office has received less than 25 letters and no more than 40 phone calls from people expressing concern about the guidelines.”  Yet somehow around the same time on a workday in the middle of the week, just feet from her office,  “On June 13, 120 people gathered outside the chancery office in Jefferson City to pray the rosary for the guidelines to be rescinded.”  Maybe she means that out of 400 voicemails she returned 40 phone calls.  1 out of 10, are we becoming too optimistic in this post?  What are the odds of that!  Readers from the mostly rural and blue collar Diocese of Jefferson City surely think about their experience contacting these people when contemplating a donation to the Diocese.  Sister Julie, you were speaking to all of the people who contacted you, making your sales pitch for school enrollment and the October capital campaign.  The $25 million question for you and Bishop Gaydos is, have you both told the truth to your supporters?  

Smile, the World is watching you.

Gaydos Big Smile





IOU’s for the Diocese. Clip the coupons, go ahead, do it.

Here are printable IOU coupons that you can drop in the collection plate on Sunday.  The message is that we aren’t leaving the Church but rather our leaders have left us and when they return to reality the money will be there waiting.  They have to learn to stop allowing or covering up child abuse.  If this causes your local parish distress, and that would take some time anyway,  then at that time you could use your money to pay the utilities directly or pay your priest’s bills directly.  His boss has financial control over him but you have financial control over his boss.  We have all the power we need to do good, it just takes a couple dozen good and courageous people in each parish.  The priests need a little encouragement to overcome their fear.  They need your correction and also support to do their part to end abuse.  IOU’s for transparency.

Coupons JPEG

Official Diocesan Statement (Plus our Questions and Comments). Enjoy twisting your mind around it.

The Diocese just issued this statement.  It looks like a rehash of the emails and letters that they and some priests and deacons have been sending.  It doesn’t answer any hard questions or address much of anything we’ve said.  We’ll add comments in bold below but please keep in mind the title of their own 17 page document: “A Pastoral Process of Accompaniment and Dialogue Addressing Children and Youth in Relation to Gender Concerns and Non-Traditional Families”  Pastors are guided to Accompany children and youth in gender concerns, and the Bishop will allow his schools to do so in person when the pastor enrolls them, which the New York Times has praised :

“The diocese of Jefferson City, Mo., for example, said last month that it would permit transgender students in its Catholic schools.”  -New York Times

Shouldn’t the Bishop be issuing a statement to correct the New  York Times?

KRCG-TV, Channel 13 in Jefferson City, ran a news story on the 10 o’clock news on 6/29, regarding an internal document (They didn’t intend to have to defend it publicly and didn’t reason through it well enough) provided to diocesan priests and school principals at presentations in May. This document, prepared for administrative use at the parish level, (Not the parental level and they’re not sorry) provides guidance (Guidance means they are guiding pastors and principals in some direction, which they wish to imply isn’t what the title says) on considering admittance of children to parish schools and programs when households are non-traditional, that is, not led by a mother and father who are married in the Church.  (And transgender students who may come from a traditional household.)

The news story may have been confusing to many people (Sister downplayed the response saying less than 25 letters and 40 phone calls so how can she admit it’s many?) regarding the intent, content and use of this document. (They got plenty of air time to explain it, is it because we’re too blue collar and rural to understand?  The only confusing thing lies in their commentary which contradicts their own document) The diocese wants to make clear that the document makes no changes from current practice. (Then why issue a 17 page document full of heretical sources, to give official cover to current practice which is to allow enrollment of these students?) The document is intended as a tool to use when and if these unusual enrollment situations occur. (It’s already been when, not if) The diocese believes parishes should engage and have conversations with members of these households who inquire about enrollment in a school or program; (Nowhere in the 17 pages does it tell pastors how to “converse” with these people about what the Church teaches about their situation) however, the diocese is not advocating the recruitment or enrollment of children from non-traditional households for its schools and programs. (Millie Aulbur, did you write this legalistic line?  They Bishop isn’t advocating but he is ALLOWING) Decisions regarding enrollment will always be made by the parish leadership because pastors (Bishop Gaydos allows pastors to enroll transgender students) and other parish administrators are responsible for acting in the good of the local parish community. (In one parish it may be good to enroll a transgender student, in another not.  What is the point of funding a Church and having moral code if official practice contradicts it?)  

Further, there is no diocesan ‘transgender policy’ (When the Bishop with all of his authority allows something then in praxis it’s a policy, but you may call it a “process” whereby any pastor has the authority to use the process to enroll a transgender student.)  concerning the enrollment or retention (Retention because it already happened) of students. The document provides guidance regarding how to pastorally address the issue of a child wishing to present as the opposite gender. In no instance will a girl or boy be permitted access to a single-sex facility designated for the opposite sex. (Pastors are allowed to admit transgender students on their own terms and the school must accept an identity that the Church calls a lie, but not in the one instance of the bathroom?  Is that consistent?  What about a sports locker room?  Or overnight events?  If they are what Bishop Gaydos is allowing them to say they are how can you all logically deny them the bathroom of their identity?)

Questions regarding this matter can be directed to the diocese by clicking the “Contact Us” menu item and filling out the form, or calling 573-635-9127  (This is their one good idea, do ask them questions.  There is a good list of questions for you to ask here)

Again, If it’s all no big deal then why does the New York Times praise the Bishop and his process in a pro-gay article?  It’s the hypocrisy that is so difficult, we live in a time when the LGBT advocates are more consistent, articulate, and logical in their policy then the Chancery.  That’s what duplicity brings to the table.

Transgender questions for Bishop Gaydos and Fr. Joe Corel.


The Bishop and the two nuns who created this revolutionary process went to school decades ago.  They did not grow up bearing the brunt of the sexual revolution and have neither lived marriage nor raised children.  They did not cope with internet pornography as kids, it is unlikely that they had any transgender kids in their school.  But they would use their absolute authority to bring social chaos to local Catholic schools and they have so far been indifferent to the concerns of parents.  The talking points they have given priests imply that in this “mostly rural Diocese” the transgender issue just won’t come up, so don’t worry about it.  Yet we have been informed several times that there was a transgender 8th grade student at St. Peter’s Grade School in Jefferson City and that the student is going to attend Helias Catholic High School.  We plan to add to this list over time, here are some questions they refuse to answer:

Even if it happens in only 1 out of our 40 schools may a pastor of the Diocese of Jefferson City MO admit to his school a first grade girl who dresses, acts, and identifies as a boy?

If so does that child have to cease behaving in that way?

If not then if other children refuse to refer to the girl as a boy will they be reprimanded?

Later on if the child begins hormone therapy to delay puberty may or should school staff comment on that process?  May they try to discourage parents from committing what some feminists call “a criminal violation of human rights?”

Do you think it is morally permissible for a parent to give hormones to a 7 year old child that lead to sterilization?

Would you allow your priests and school staff to remain silent while a child was sterilized?  If you didn’t allow it how would you logically reconcile that with other priests admitting such children to their school?

At the proper age may a girl who identifies as a boy become an altar server?  If a pastor admits that child to the school what reasoning would he use to deny the child the opportunity to serve at the altar?

May the same person as an adult become a communion minister, or deacon, or priest?

May a man become a deacon if married to a man who identifies as a woman?

If a priest may admit a transgender child as the opposite sex then what reasoning will you use to deny the girl-now-boy access to the seminary?

If you do deny access to the altar or seminary are you not stating that the person really isn’t the sex with which they identify?

If you deny their identification in that situation wouldn’t it be a lie to go along with the transgender identity in other situations?

Is it alright for a Catholic to lie?

Think about the progression of LGBT publicity and issues over the last 10 years, do you really think the Diocese will magically avoid facing these questions in every school for the indefinite future as your priest talking point imply?  Are you living in 1955?

See below,


“May I now become a communion minister or Deacon? If not then why?”


Our commentary on KRCG 13 and Columbia Daily Tribune coverage of the “process.”

The Columbia Daily Tribune, here, and KRCG 13 new in Jefferson city, here,  ran a special report on the new transgender process in Diocesan Catholic Schools.  We’d like to review some of the highlights of the KRCG report because Bishop Gaydos and Sister Youngs either don’t understand logic or are trying very hard to conceal their intent and what will actually happen as a result of their use of authority to instruct pastors.    We’ll quote the article and then add commentary in bold:

“Representatives with the diocese said they needed to give guidance to principals and pastors on what to do in situations when children had gender concerns or came from non-traditional backgrounds.”  This implies that the Chancery is guiding principals and pastors to a conclusion on what to do, not just passively letting them make the decision.  

“We’re not teaching that to be gay and lesbian or to be transgender or bisexual is right,”  So we can conclude that they think being gay and lesbian, transgender, or bisexual isn’t right. 

“They’re all created by God and they all have dignity because they’re God’s children. And if their parents want them to have a Catholic school education, then we want to be partners with those parents in bringing those children into the faith,”  Since being gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender isn’t right then bringing the children into the faith must involve these children believing their own identity isn’t right which means the transgender child must reject being transgender before being admitted to the school.  

“Sister Brandt said the document was only guidance and ultimately it was up to pastors and principals to decide whether they enrolled non-traditional students.”  Though they admit that that being transgender isn’t right they have decided to let pastors admit those children as they are if they wish.  

“In a letter from Bishop John Gaydos to pastors on the topic, he said, in part, “I support the development and presentation of this program that promotes our Catholic moral teachings and supports the role of pastor to act in the best interests of the people of this parish.”  Which is it Bishop Gaydos? Your staff are saying that being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender isn’t right which means your support of Catholic moral teaching precludes you from accepting such behavior in a school.  Yet you support the pastor if he thinks admitting these children is in the best interest of his parish? This is textbook duplicity.  

Jackie Marcink, the president of Mid-Missouri Pridefest, gets pretty close to the mark and should be praised for her clear consistent thought:

“I feel like it’s a bit of a front,” she said. “These families and children still have to abide by their covenant of trust which explicitly says social and moral values. I’m pretty sure we all know what that means. I can’t really say that this is fair. If they don’t want LGBT families, it seems like quite a process to put people through to ensure they are agreeing to what the Catholic Church wants them to do.”  With the exception that at some schools they will be admitted if the pastor chooses.

“She said instead of putting the document out there, and setting families up for failure, the diocese should draw a line.”  We agree that the Bishop should draw the line, that it is impossible for such a family to abide by the covenant of trust, and that it is mean to put them through this muddled process. 

Sister Brandt said the diocese has an opportunity to help children, not hurt them.  Does the 17 page document clearly tell them anything about their lifestyle one way or the other?  If the Church teaches that these choices hurt them then shouldn’t the process clearly say so? 

“Our Church is very clear in its teachings, and we’re not going to say that being of those persuasions is the right way to be,” she said.  So the Bishop has drawn a line?  Yes, out of one side of his mouth.  But out of the other side Bishop Gaydos “Supports the role of the pastor to act in the best interests of the people of this parish.”  Which means he draws no line because he says that being those persuasions is harmful to a person but chooses to allow his pastors to not help them.  

The only logical conclusion one can draw from this contradictory nonsense is that Bishop Gaydos and his staff are using LGBT families and transgender children as cannon fodder to advance their own process, which is the process of revolution in our Diocese. 

If you have a moment allow us a further comment on Sister’s claim that they’ve received not more than 25 letters and 40 phone calls.  Her need to state figures implies an need for damage control.  Let’s assume, despite what we’ve seen from her, that she’s telling the truth.  In the digital age saying you only received 25 letters is like saying you only received 5 telegrams or 2 messages by Morse code.  If 25 people actually put pen to paper and mailed a letter then undoubtedly an order of magnitude more used email.  As for the 40 phone calls we implore you to call the Chancery just once and see if anyone answers.  People have left upwards of 10 voicemails in order to get one conversation, some have finally chosen to drop in unannounced.  Sister, do we need to start publishing phone calls and conversations in audio and video to get your attention?   You are just making things harder for yourself and everyone else by taking local parents for country bumpkin fools.