Ex-Gay Speaker Hopes Tour Will Set Connecticut Straight on Homosexual Issues

Bennett says while all human beings deserve to be treated with love, all behaviors do not need to be encouraged or tolerated. ... “America better wake up; that's all I say. I don't mean to sound harsh or angry, but it's gotten to the point right now where homosexuality is just so accepted now, it's being promoted on every television show.”

I thank God that men like Bennett have found Christ and are willing to come forward to help others see the errors of their way.

Homosexual agenda ping.

God bless Bennet, and protect him when the pervofascists go spastic in response to his show.

Former homosexual? Is everyone with the last name Bennett a kook nowadays?

ditto to your statement

hahah it looks like Ex-Gay as in Former Gay LOL

Kook? Excuse me?

ummm...you have no idea what you're talking about. Do a little research before you make an ignorant statement.

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Good for Bennet, and any other former homosexuals who are trying to dispell the lie that homosexuals are 'born that way' and can't change.

Here's an excellent article with lots of info down the thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1420619/posts
Root Causes, Homosexual Consequences

Another website with stories of those who left the "gay" life:
http://www.drthrockmorton.com/idoexist.asp

And the mother of all links about homosexuality:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~scripter/index

Freepmail me AND DirtyHarryY2K if you want on/off this pinglist.

I apologize if my remark has offended Tony Bennett and his fans.

Thanks for the ping, little jeremiah.

I have a question for you: do you think the homosexual lifestyle is becoming more acceptable among young conservatives? See post #4 on this thread. I remember reading stories along similar lines by a conservative author who spent time on various campuses. Just wondering if the PC nonsense has gotten to them.

According to my understanding, which comes solely from reading, as I live practically like a hermit far away from many people, is that the public schools (and many private ones, but especially public) have been the targets of homosexual activists for some time. Add to that the pro-homosexual influence on TV, movies and the media in general, and we do have a younger generation which is more accepting of homosexuality. Whether I would call any of these conservative is another matter. They certainly couldn't be called social conservatives.

But another factor is that as people grow up, have families of their own, get some sense knocked into them, they often become more conservative. Many here on FR used to be ultra liberal, and due to personal growth and maturity, have become conservative all around. I'm an example of that. Also note that in every state where "gay" marriage was voted on by the people, it failed miserably.

Also not to be ignored is the large and increasing home schooling movement. No one even knows exactly how many children are homeschooled, as many don't plug in to the system and are therefore not counted.

There are vocal supporters of homosexuality on FR, but they generally get banned sooner or later, if they are rabid about it. If those of us who see the truth about homosexuality keep speaking up, and do our best to fight the agenda, I have no doubt it will eventually be defeated. If it isn't, there will social disruption and more that we can barely even imagine. Not that homosexuality is the "mother of all evils" but it is certainly an emblem of much that is wrong with society.

Another small point is that the more homosexuals shove their agenda down our throats in particularly offensive ways, the more people who were previously tolerant and "live and let live" become fed up. I have read many, many comments exactly like that on FR. Things like:

"I used to not care what homosexuals did or said, as long as they left me alone. But I've had it! No more tolerance for me, they should go back in the closet!"

And similar sentiments. So the more "gay" parades, TV shows, public offensiveness, and the like - the more people who were previously unaware or tolerant start to wake up and lose their so-called tolerance (of the intolerable). Being tolerant of that which should not be tolerated is not a virtue.

I'd like to try to answer your question from a college age perspective. You asked if homosexuality is more acceptable among young conservatives. I would definitely answer that it is indeed, from my experience. As a straight male, I don't see how it effects me one way or the other. I do not claim to speak for all young conservatives, but most that I know are conservative on social issues, but are conservative on defense and economic issues. I'm sure young religious conservatives are just as zealous as the old in hating gays, but most of us don't really see the point in expending energy in hatred of people who don't really do any harm. Being anti-gay is no longer acceptable in polite society. Shoving any kind of sex in someone's face is crass and improper, but someone merely living a private lifestyle doesn't really harm anyone else.

On my campus, as on most, the most conservative students can be found in fraternities, which are almost exclusively Republican, especially in the Southern school I attended. Many of those frat members, on what I consider good information, have had homosexual experiences. Fewer and fewer actively oppose gays and most believe, as do most behavioral scientists, that most homosexuality is inborn and cannot be changed, just as a heterosexual is born liking the opposite sex. The only logical reason for coercively changing someone's sexual orientation is that it is against Christianity, since no other harm really comes from it, although many find its mere existence to be offensive.

I think it's fruitless to expect society to retrogress on acceptance of homosexuality because people are who they are. Most of the people on FR are over 40; they grew up in a time in which there was no open homosexuality in the media, so it frightens them, religious conservative or not. Being a conservative does not require condemning homosexuality, as anti-gay beliefs are not mutually exclusive with believing in small government, the right to bear arms, a strong defense, toughness on crime, or the death penalty. Just as Elvis swiveling his hips and Cher exposing her navel were thought of as scandalous in the past, homosexuality is the topic of hot debate now. The simplest and best explanation I can offer is that it is passe to gaybash for the most part, it's like being like your "embarassing parents." I expect flames on this post, but I think my vision of conservatism for the far future is much more likely than expecting everyone 60 years from now to be exactly like we are today.

retrogress?

I see you are dogmatic about the proper view of morality based upon how the moral left feels at the moment. Oh, but the experts say....yes, we know, we have seen their 'unbiased' handywork for decades.

This is nothing most of us have not heard or predicted long ago. Yours are simply the views of an extremist liberal not long ago.

I probably don't blame you too much. You are simply the product of the leftist and hippie agenda of the 1960s.

You have the moral views that were given to you by the left as you have been subjected to the 'proper viewpoint' on moral issues day after day in the News, Hollywood, Phil Donahue, Jerry Springer, Rosie O'Donnell, Filth Gumbel, the sitcoms, the documentaries, the NEA education system, the popular culture.

As you know, a dead fish floats down stream and offers no resistance to the current. I am sorry to hear you have surrendered before you even learned to stand upright.

If your foundation for morality has been removed, or never existed in the first place, then there acually is no right or wrong for you.

If those with no moral foundation get to call the shots, there is nothing immoral except calling something immoral, that will lead to diversity training for the offender. Now there is some real tolerance, NOT.

Former homosexual?

Indeed. Informed folks know that ex-gays/former homosexuals exist and their numbers are growing.

I Do Exist
Testimonals of ex-gays

I'm sure young religious conservatives are just as zealous as the old in hating gays, but most of us don't really see the point in expending energy in hatred of people who don't really do any harm.

You say you don't speak for all young conservatives but you have no problem trying to speak for and completely misrepresenting the position of those you disagree with. That's right out of the homosexual agenda playbook found in After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's.

Fewer and fewer actively oppose gays and most believe, as do most behavioral scientists, that most homosexuality is inborn and cannot be changed, just as a heterosexual is born liking the opposite sex.

There is no evidence homosexuality is inborn yet there is plenty of evidence the major factor behind homosexuality is environment. And there is a growing number of therapists who believe homosexuals can leave the lifestyle.

They have done a great job of brainwashing/indoctinating you!! I suggest you do some research before you profess it "does no harm" here.

Touche' scripter!! well said.

And by the way, youthgonewild, you name is very appropriate for your views. And NO ONE here hates homosexuals. Quite the contrary.

I couldn't agree more, and I'm well over 40. Homosexuality has existed through the ages, and in all societies. It's been variously tolerated and condemned, but neither social attitude seems to have affected its incidence in the population. I don't like having it hard-sold as a political proposition, either by "in your face" (self-proclaimed) Queer activists, or by witch-burning conservatives. Mainly I'm just tired of people of either persuasion being so endlessly self-righteous and immoderate.

I don't think all older conservatives hate gay behavior, but most of them do and definitely at a greater rate than younger conservatives. Older people in general are less likely to be tolerant of alternative lifestyles that have become more acceptable over time regardless of political views on other issues.

I challenge any of you to show me how homosexuality is objectively and physically harmful. Maybe you'll read something cooked up by a think tank, but check any legitimate scientific journal and it will back up my statement. I anticipate many will attack those legitimate scientists as leftists pushing through an agenda, but that is pretty much the only attack that can be launched, aside from the religious argument. You want to talk about intolerance, attacking me as a member of the left because I don't believe everything you think a young conservative should believe is ridiculous, since times change and people are products of their era to some extent.

I think you would do well to embrace young conservatives and not insist that how things were in your day are how things should be now. I suppose Dick Cheney is a member of the radical left for supporting gay marriage? People live in the real world and have to deal with these issues and for the most part can't simply stop being gay. Some gay behavior can be changed, like the Paris Hilton type who engage in lesbian behavior to impress guys or to be trendy, but many are simply born that way.

"I challenge any of you to show me how homosexuality is objectively and physically harmful."

I too, was young, and thought I knew it all.

Youthgonewild, I'm not attacking you, but you sound like both sides of the fence in your age bracket - as someone from the generation before you, I can see things a little more clearly than you - you're too much "in the trenches", so to speak. You're wishy washy on the subject, and you bring little to the table beyond wishful thinking.

Being gay may not cause physical harm, it's true, unless you're the type that frequents the Power Exchange in San Francisco...unless you look at the BEHAVIOR of the gay community in regards to communicable disease, and their place in society. I'm not mad at homosexuals, I'm mad at THEIR BEHAVIOR.

The way they ACT causes more harm to our society than any research paper will EVER even hint at.

Homosexual men and women have existed before, in almost every society - even a casual glimspe at Greek history will reveal it, as much of the pottery and art cannot be shown in the public due to it's graphic sexual nature.

That culture had no problems with homosexuality. They got along fine.

However, we are not that society. We have a different moral foundation, and you cannot simply insist people drop that foundation, simply because you want it. That's the crux of the Islamic invasion in our contry and others, as well. Such change is generational if not epochical - otherwise you have rebellion, social warfare, and in some cases outright war.

Beyond that, the problem with our gay population to many is not that they exist, but it's that they seek to shove in it people's faces, to demand as rights the things that have been earned by everyone else, and they expect to be allowed to do whatever they want without any consequence or responsibility, but seek to have utter control on society and culture, and will throw tantrums if they don't get their way. Being "gay" in our culture now means to be militant, and that has a direct and visible harm on our society.

Personally, I have a lot of negative feelings for the gay community just on the topic of AIDS. They knew early on what it was, how contagious it is, and how fatal. They know, just as well as anyone, how hard it will be to finally find a cure. But they put their selfish and personal rights in front of dealing with the disease in any effective or rational way - we were told "hands off" and not allowed to even ASK if they were infected. The damage from AIDS, and how far it's spread, and will continue to spread, is entirely on the heads of the gay community, and they will NEVER acknowledge that.

I personally don't care what people do, or who they do. I've accepted the existence of gay men and women, and while I do not support or celebrate their existence, they are human beings who by nature of being born American are afforded the same rights you and I are. I'm not a very religious person, so I don't look at them from the point of view of those that are, but I also support and will fight to the death the right of the riligious folks who do not support homosexuality, because it offends their religious moral foundation.

THAT is the basis of our country, and what we fight for daily. The Constitution was not written to keep everyone from bieng offended or to create a cucoon where nothing nasty filters through, it allows people to have opinions, and to never let them be punished for expressing those opinions.

If a gay man or woman wants to speak out against the president, that's fine - they have that right (Within limits, of course, pictures of a gun to the Pres. head is strictly over the line), and we should fight for that right, even though we disagree. However, if they demand rights and priviledges because of their sexuality, that's when I say no. That's all: no. The Constitution is not about personal gratification, yet they seem to think so. That's why i disagree with them AS A COMMUNITY, and fight their ideas. You're "live and let live, there's nothing really wrong with it" is simply the first few steps towards them winning the war on ideas - they've softened you up to the point where you can't even make a decision on how you stand on an issue, and you rationalize their impact on society with nothing to back it up.

We can go on forever talking about homosexuality as a sexual predisposition, or learned behavior, what have you. However, we live in a real world, and we have to look at it in the context of the world we live in. You do not do this. You are too young to start seeing the persepctive one gets as we grow older - I'm not that old, but I'm starting to see the bigger picture - again, I was young once, and thought I knew it all. The gay issues have disrupted and mangled large parts of our society, and that's impossible to do without angering some - instead of lecturing the "older conservatives" who are so full of hate, as you imply, why not listen to what they say, and try and figure out their perspective? then take the issue in the CONTEXT OF OUR SOCIETY - and look at their behavior, and tell me they're no harm?

Please, try. I think you'll learn a lot in the process, if you keep an open mind and not take it personally.

What is the basis for your morality? What has been the moral basis for the overwhelming majority of Americans since Plymouth rock?

Something will shape your morality. It might be the pompous musings of a group of mental theorists or it may be a professor pumping their thoughts into your head; or it might be the media or hollywood or Oprah Winfrey or the perverted Bill Maher.

Again, I am sorry to hear that you so quickly discarded conservative moral values for the immorality of the 1960s anti-American left. Its a real shame. Their ideas and morals are lethal and they hate everything about the traditional U.S.A. and our view of reality.

The same moral left that you have accepted as 'correct' gave us the drug culture, abortion on demand, the culture of the welfare state, the proliferation of the AIDS plague, the pornography culture and other destructive gifts.

You seem to be under the delusion that morality or a strong moral basis is a minor detail; this characteristic is almost unanimously common to someone who has been brainwashed by the left. They have no true moral basis, therefore a true moral basis must be ruled insignificant. If by chance you are allowed to have a moral basis, it can be any moral basis except the one that most Americans have had since the Pilgrims landed.

Morality and the moral basis our fathers gave us is not something to be taken lightly and then to be discarded for some know-it-all's bum guess.

Whoa there dude, never said we didn't hate gay "behavior" for we do, just not homosexuals themselves.

There are a multitude of health problems associated with homosexual behavior, even though for some crazy reason, it may not be PC to say so. You don't have to be particularly smart to recognize that fact either. It is also harmful the emotional development, as well as mental development of children to be exposed to it. You have simply fallen pray to the desensitization of the homosexual agenda.

There is huge amounts of evidence that homosexual behavior is learned, NOT born in. Were it to be a born that way issue, identical twins, with their identical genes would both, or neither, be gay, and that is not so.

It is a behavior, learned and facilitated by the very people trying to force it into normalcy. Every article or study claiming to prove it is a born condition, has been refuted.

It's no different from porn, s&m, werewolf-hood (if you will), or the practice of inflicting pain for pleasure, in that all are behaviors, all push the envelope to buck society, and rebel, all addictive as people seek the more and more forbidden. It is, in fact, de[raved behavior, that will kill a person.

Here at FR we prefer to love the sinner, hate the sin. In so doing, perhaps we can save a few from the deadly lifestyles.

youthgonewild
Since Aug 5, 2005

Both of you, very good posts!

John, I would go a step further and say, moral basis is what drives our lives. It's what makes unnecessary laws, unnecessary, since our moral values already forbid us from committing those crimes, NOT laws. Those of us with strong moral values wouldn't think of harming another human being, or stealing, or even littering!! While the left wants laws allowing for things that are not illegal, and laws that ban things that are already forbidden by our own moral laws, and we would never think of commuting in the first place.

The point is, all the laws in the world, still will not dictate our moral values, which may be tougher that the law is. That is why you need a nation with strong morals, and you should never try to disassemble them.

I challenge any of you to show me how homosexuality is objectively and physically harmful.

Apparently you aren't familiar with the severe health hazards of the homosexual lifestyle:

2005

Methamphetamine's Clutch Leaves More Gays Addicted, Infected (NewHouse), FreeRepublic
Mystery AIDS strain 'patient zero' found (Washing Times), FreeRepublic
Gays faced with new STD strains (Miami Herald), FreeRepublic
'New AIDS' spreading among homosexual men (WorldNetDaily), FreeRepublic
Rare sexually transmitted disease reported in Boston (Boston Herald)
Syphilis on the rise with gays (Greenwich Time), FreeRepublic
The African heterosexual AIDS myth (TownHall), FreeRepublic
Party, Play.And Pay (Newsweek), FreeRepublic
HIV 'supervirus' is a warning to all (Sydney Morning Herald), FreeRepublic
S.D. man could have aggressive HIV strain (San Diego), FreeRepublic
All The Condoms In The World (Christian Undergound), FreeRepublic
Criminalizing The Transmission Of The AIDS Virus (FreeRepublic)
HIV harbinger (Original Source Not Available)
Gays Debate Radical Steps to Curb Unsafe Sex (New York Times), FreeRepublic
2 new patients may hold clues to potent HIV Strains analyzed for possible links to N.Y. man's virus (San Francisco Chronicle), FreeRepublic
Rare and Aggressive H.I.V. Reported in New York (New York Times), FreeRepublic
New resistant strain of HIV diagnosed in New Yorker (Crains), FreeRepublic
Homosexual Males Award Us Again (Christian Underground), FreeRepublic
Rare sex disease strikes in New York (Original Source Not Available)
Some gays yearn for infection (PJ Star), FreeRepublic
Erasure star admits he wanted to be diagnosed with HIV (Female First (UK)), FreeRepublic

2004

A Psychoanalyst's Perspective: AIDS And The Death Wish (NARTH)
Gay Men Lament the Problem of Unsafe Sex in Poz (NARTH)
Rare STD turns up in San Francisco, prompting warning (Modesto Bee), FreeRepublic
Protesters back Milford teen who was rejected as blood donor (New Haven Register), FreeRepublic
AIDS rate for homosexuals climbs; data called 'astonishing' (BP News), FreeRepublic
HIV, AIDS cases rise among U.S. gay, bisexual men (Original Source Not Available)
Experts: Anti-AIDS Drugs Encourage Risky Behaviors (NARTH)
Staph infections linked to 'manscaping' (body shaving) (Southern Voice), FreeRepublic
The Many Myths of AIDS (Fumento)
Playing it unsafe (Metro Times), FreeRepublic
'Not a simple answer' for desert's syphilis problem (Blue Pages), FreeRepublic
"Crystal Meth" Use Boosts STD Rates Among Gay Men (Health Finder), FreeRepublic
"Crystal Meth" New Drug Of Choice On Gay Party Circuit (NARTH), FreeRepublic
Meth, Viagra increase STDs among gay men (MSNBC)
Gays' Use of Viagra and Methamphetamine Is Linked to Diseases (New York Times), FreeRepublic
The Beast in the Bathhouse; Crystal Meth Use by Gay Men Threatens to Reignite an Epidemic (New York Times), FreeRepublic
Rare infection may be risk to gay men in US (IOL)
2002 STD Treatment Guidelines recommendations for MSM - March 8, 2004 (CDC)
Antibiotic-resistant strain of syphilis is spreading (Original Source Not Available)
Police: Partiers Injected With Blood At Sex Parties (Local 6), FreeRepublic
The Immoral Minority (The Stranger), FreeRepublic
Homosexual Behavior a National Public Health Issue (News With Views)
Drug-proof gonorrhea rises in homosexuals (WorldNetDaily), FreeRepublic
'Gift' of potentially lethal sex is linked to rise in HIV cases (The Independent(UK))
Syphilis Relapse (Village Voice), FreeRepublic
Students Protest Blood Drive Screening (Original Source Not Available)
Internet blamed in spread of syphilis among gays (Yahooo), FreeRepublic
HIV/AIDS Statistics (NIH) (NIH)
New study: homosexual men promiscuous (BP News), FreeRepublic

2003

2002

The Health Risks of Gay Sex (Catholic Education)
The Health Risks of Gay Sex (Corporate Research Council)
Why Isn't Homosexuality Considered A Disorder On The Basis Of Its Medical Consequences? (NARTH)
Syphilis in gay men raises AIDS concern (Original Source Not Available)
Syphilis outbreak among L.A. gay men in 2002 leads to calls for more testing (Advocate)
Just the Facts: AIDS & the Homosexual Lifestyle! (Alliace for Life Ministries)
Health and Homosexuality ( ), FreeRepublic
Desensitizing America, Part I: AIDS Sensitivity Training (Toogood Reports), FreeRepublic
Desensitizing America, Part II: The AIDS Walk (Toogood Reports)
California to track HIV cases by code AIDS-delaying drugs mask disease's spread (San Francisco Chronicle)

2001

Harvard Homosexual Leader Urges Others To Lie When Donating Blood (Original Source Not Available)
Young gay, bisexual men still hard hit by AIDS (CNN), FreeRepublic
With Fears Fading, More Gays Spurn Old Preventive Message (Original Source Not Available)
U.S. HIV and AIDS cases reported through December 2000 (CDC)
The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality (Family Research Council)
Gays Party on AIDS Dollars While Patients Suffer (Original Source Not Available)
SF doctors report "startling" increase of syphilis (Original Source Not Available)
Is This Gay Behavior Sick? (Original Source Not Available)
Gay health statistics (FreeRepublic)
Compassionate Society Should Discourage Deadly Homosexual Behavior (American Family Association), FreeRepublic

2000

HIV infection and risk behaviours among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver (Canadian Medical Assn.), FreeRepublic
Sharing Disease is Not a Civil Right (Santa Rosa Junior College)
Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention (NIH)
Homosexuals Demand Legalization of Sex With Strangers... (Agape Press), FreeRepublic
Homosexual behavior increases risk of AIDS (Centre Daily Times)

1999

Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do (Family Research Institute)

1998

The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS: A Nine-Year Retrospective of Fear and (Mostly) Loathing (Fumento), FreeRepublic

1997

Modelling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men (International Journal of Epidemiology), FreeRepublic
Modelling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men (Reprint) (International Journal of Epidemiology )
Anything But Gay: The Deadly and Dangerous Homosexual Lifestyle (Original Source Not Available)

1992

Sexual Politics And Scientific Logic: The Issue Of Homosexuality (Journal of Psychohistory (Socarides))

Hey, you challenged me. Apparently you've never read my profile.

Were it to be a born that way issue, identical twins, with their identical genes would both, or neither, be gay, and that is not so.

Excellent point, gidget7. Here's an article on the subject:

The Importance of Twin Studies

I anticipate many will attack those legitimate scientists as leftists pushing through an agenda...

Unfortunately, many are. The APA is over run with homosexuals and homosexuals activists. Here's an article by liberals about liberals on this very subject:

Liberals Reveal 'Destructive Trends' in Mental Health Profession

Here's another: Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm

And I have a much longer review of the book in hard copy that I need to scan in. So yes, many of the liberal scientists pushing homosexuality as normal are being attacked by liberal scientists. They are appalled with what is going on in the APA.

but that is pretty much the only attack that can be launched, aside from the religious argument.

Please note that none of the articles I've posted use the religious argument.