Not so gung-ho about gun control? According to a state government web page, you have a murderous sexual fetish.

Brought to our attention by a member, the LGBT glossary of DCF’s Safe Harbor Project defines “ammosexual” as:


‘Wink, wink.’

FIC, in no uncertain terms, condemns violent crime (particularly the recent murder of nine people in Charleston) — but we also oppose the vilification of many law-abiding citizens by agents of the state.

This isn’t our first rodeo with DCF. In 2009, we got them to remove links that violated the First Amendment. Although they might claim with a straight face to protect children from “bigotry…intolerance, indoctrination, proselytizing or prejudice,” the Safe Harbor Project has a heavy and distinct ideological bias. One of their “Latest News” links directs to images of men in dresses, a tiara, false eyelashes, and Grandma’s earrings. Traditional Judeo-Christian sexual ethics are not going to be represented fairly, if they are represented at all — to the detriment of our youth. Heaven forbid anybody try to help young people find peace and dignity the politically incorrect way.

Still, who in the heck is running quality control for these evidently user-submitted terms? Another member told us, “This doesn’t read like a government site. I thought I was reading The Onion.” Is this outrageous smear on thousands of Connecticut citizens really endorsed by an agency funded with our tax dollars to promote the welfare of children?

Is this outrageous smear on thousands of Connecticut citizens really endorsed by an agency funded with our tax dollars to promote the welfare of children?

“Ammosexual” is hardly the only noxious content. Remember, this “resource” is intended for minor children…particularly vulnerable children. At this site they are presented with the idea of “ethical” polyamory and “safe, sane, consensual” sadomasochism — because a child with an already off-kilter example of how love relationships within the family are supposed to work could totally, easily navigate that.

Beyond purporting to define slang terms, DCF also plays speech police, instructing readers what they are not allowed to say. This goes way beyond a generally-accepted consensus on rude epithets. “Homosexual” is verboten, as is “sexual preference,” “gay lifestyle,” and “disordered.” Additionally, one is not allowed to “associate gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people or relationships with pedophilia, child abuse, sexual abuse, bestiality, bigamy, polygamy, adultery and/or incest. It’s very wrong and offensive” — no matter how apt or logical the comparison may be at the time, we suppose, or even if any of these other groups welcome the comparison themselves.

Finally, with raised eyebrow we note this bright red warning “defamatory term”:


Gee, who might those “far-right extremists,” with the nerve to think people with male anatomy shouldn’t urinate in the ladies’ room, be?

Call me cynical, but it’s almost as if nobody at DCF ever considered the hostility this page could create toward conservative or religious teens (they exist, and more than a few of them come to us with joy and relief).

The page states, “If you know of any terminology that we may have missed, please let us know. Send us an e-mail to” Missed terminology, indeed.

DCF is promoting confusing, harmful, one-sided, patently offensive and unprofessional material to kids on the taxpayer’s dime. This page should come down.