Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Impact of Open Homosexuality in Scouting (Pre-vote statement)
OnMyHonor.net ^ | May 2013 | John Stemberger

Posted on 05/25/2013 5:32:34 PM PDT by servo1969

(OnMyHonor.Net is the nationwide coalition of concerned parents, Scout Leaders, Scouting Donors, Eagle Scouts and other members of the Boy Scouts of America who are united in their support of Scouting’s current membership policies and their opposition to the proposed resolution which requires open homosexuality in the Boy Scouts.)

On May 9, 2013, pro-resolution BSA officials issued a document entitled “Membership Resolution Points of Clarification” which appears to be a direct response to OnMyHonor.Net’s “Ten Reasons Delegates Should Vote No”. This is a point-by-point response to the Points of Clarification written exclusively for voting BSA delegates.

First, the single most important thing that delegates should know which has never been mentioned by any the pro-resolution BSA materials is that even though the proposed resolution would not apply to adults immediately, legal experts estimate the new rule will also extend to everyone in the BSA, including adults, within only a couple of years because of lawsuits that will be brought by gay-rights activists under state non-discrimination clauses around the country once a gay Boy Scout turns 18 and is removed from the program. The resolution is the first step in a two-step process in the whole program. 

Second, there has been a lack of clarity regarding the nature of the actual words being amending to the current BSA policy, namely “open and avowed homosexuality”.

The essence of the difference between the old policy and the proposed new policy is that the old policy prohibits “open and avowed” homosexuality for both BSA youth and adult members but the new policy removes that prohibition for boys and requires every BSA unit to accept “open and avowed” homosexual youth up to 17 years old. Importantly, the current policy already allows for BSA members who have a same-sex attraction but do not act out openly or inappropriately to be in good standing and to earn Scouting’s highest rank of Eagle. This is a critical point that has been obscured by pro-resolution advocates but one which is irrefutable.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials Say:

1. “This proposal is in line with Scouting’s principles and virtues.” 

OnMyHonor.Net Says:

This statement seems close to a reversal of the BSA’s own values which were stated before the United States Supreme Court. The BSA’s official position and argument before the Court in the BSA vs. Dale case was:

“The Boy Scouts asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly those represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean,” and that the organization does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.”

Further, in July 2012 last year, after an eleven member BSA committee studied the membership policy for two years they concluded that the prohibition on open and avowed homosexuality was “the absolute best policy” for the BSA according to the Associated Press. The sad reality of why the BSA did a complete reversal on this issue within a matter of months was the direct result of the relentless pressure and advocacy from gay-rights activists after the BSA affirmed their policy last year.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials say:

2. “This proposal is in line with the beliefs of most of Scouting’s major religious chartered organizations. We are unaware of any major religious chartered organization that believes a youth member simply stating he or she is attracted to the same sex, but not engaging in sexual activity, should make him or her unwelcome in their congregation.” 

OnMyHonor.Net says:

This statement is remarkably disingenuous and fails to recognize the reality of the “gay” culture in America. “Open and avowed” homosexuality or to identify oneself as “openly gay” in America consistently involves a flaunting of sexuality and the promotion of a left-leaning social political agenda. Things described as “gay” (e.g. gay movies, gay websites, gay magazines, gay parades etc…) almost uniformly involve images, speech, symbols and content which is blatantly sexual and utterly inappropriate for children. This hyper-sexualized behavior and conduct (apart from sexual acts themselves) are precisely what the proposed Resolution opens to door to when it proposes to allow open homosexuality in the BSA. It is pure naiveté to think that the behavioral standard words articulated in the resolution’s not legally binding “whereas” clauses will prevent the kind of inappropriate conversations, sexual innuendo, gay symbolism and emphasis on exhibiting sexuality that accompanies “open and avowed homosexuality”. Finally, while most of “Scouting’s major religious chartered” churches would welcome a teenager who merely has, or struggles with, same-sex attraction, those same churches would not allow membership to an openly gay teenager who is “loud and proud” bluntly promoting things considered by the church to be immoral and sinful. The current policy clearly already allows young people with a same-sex attraction so long as they do not engage in conduct and behavior that distracts from the mission of Scouting.

Pro-Resolution BSA Advocates Say:

3. “This proposal remains true to the long-standing virtues of Scouting and allows all youth who sincerely want to be a part of Scouting the chance to experience this life-changing program…. While people have different opinions about this policy, kids are better off when they are in Scouting.” 

OnMyHonor.Net says:

The BSA cites the Voice of the Scout survey as the primary motive for the resolution, showing most BSA members indicated they would not want to deny a boy the Eagle Scout award because he tells the review Board for the first time that he is gay. This reflects the saying “Hard cases make bad law.” The rare hypothetical in the poll which most BSA members would see as unfair is no indication whatsoever of the Scouting family’s views on requiring all Scouting units to accept “openly gay” young people.

The question is not whether or not openly gay “kids are better off when they are in Scouting”. The question is whether the safety and security of boys in general are better off with the “open and avowed” homosexual boys living and sleeping with them in close quarters. Is the example and influence of a 16 year old, openly gay, high school activist really in the best interest of other boys in the program? Open and avowed homosexual kids are NOT “better off in Scouting” when their conduct and behavior is a distraction to the mission of Scouting and to the other boys in the program.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials Say:

4. “The BSA would never consider a proposal that increased risk to young people.” 

OnMyHonor.Net Says

Based upon personal and candid conversations with BSA officials at the highest levels, the BSA is fully aware that this proposed resolution will absolutely increase the risk of boy-on-boy sexual contact in Scouting and yet of there has been no discussion or risk analysis done on this topic in any of the resolution reports or presentations. It is just short of dishonest for pro-resolution BSA officials to suggest that there will be no “increased risk”. BSA’s own Youth Protection videos indicate that “70% of abuse to boys is by teenagers”. Two-deep leadership will have to be at least three-deep for units with homosexual youth. Openly gay Boy Scouts who will likely want to be treated like everyone else will instead need to be tented separately and thus singled out and treated differently. The complexity of sleeping arrangements will create a myriad of social and legal liability challenges. Sexual awareness and harassment training will be required in all Scouting units. The BSA leaders setting forth the proposed policy clearly did not have the safety and security of the boys as their paramount concern. Enacting this resolution will result in more ugly litigation and will further the public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials Say

5. “Some have asserted that this proposal will unduly interject sexuality into the BSA and take away parents’ rights to discuss sexuality at the time and place of their choosing”. 

OnMyHonor.Net Says

The proposed Resolution robs parents of the sole authority to raise issues of sex and sexuality with their kids. Parents should have the exclusive right to raise issues about sex and sexuality with their children in their own time and in their own way, in the privacy of their homes; not brought up by other older boys around a campfire. Allowing open homosexuality would inject a sensitive and highly-charged political issue into the heart of the BSA, against the wishes of the vast majority of parents.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials Say:

6. “Boy Scouts of America membership is unequivocally unified about the value of Scouting. Some have asserted that if this proposal is adopted—or if the Boy Scouts does not amend its current policy—Scouting will see significant and unrecoverable losses in membership and monetary support.” 

OnMyHonor.Net Says:

While the Voice of the Scout survey does show Scouting is popular because it brings great value, if the proposal is enacted, the program will immediately become unpopular among hundreds of thousands of its own members. A policy change would devastate the program financially, socially and legally as the BSA membership and revenues will drop instantly and the decision will gut a major percentage of human capital in the BSA. The BSA’s own estimates are that a policy change would create a “significant membership loss 200,000 to 400,000 youth”. OnMyHonor.Net’s internal estimates show the losses will be much higher at 500,000 to 600,000 youth leaving over a three-year period as the negative effects of the policy become evident. These estimates do not even calculate the hundreds of thousands of adult volunteers and parents who will leave also.

The financial impact would be enormous. The BSA’s own estimates show revenue losses at $30 million if a change is made. Camps will close, executives will be let go, and properties will be sold off as a result of the vast loss of finances from major donors, private foundations, and declining membership. If there is no change in policy, the BSA estimates that membership losses will only gradually decline over time and financial losses will be minimal.

Pro-Resolution BSA Officials Say:

7. The BSA is committed to listening to the Scouting family and engaging in open dialogue. 

OnMyHonor.Net Says:

If I ask my son to do his chores and he says “Dad, I am listening to you, I am not going to do my chores, but I am listening…” Is he really listening? No; he is merely hearing with his ears but mocking me with his actions or inaction. This is essentially what the pro-resolution BSA officials have done: ignored the vast majority of polling data showing the Scouting family clearly does not want this change and instead cited to polling on gay marriage and the moral acceptability of homosexuality in the wider culture. The authors of the resolution did listen to someone, but unfortunately it was not the Scouting family who overwhelming reject any change to the membership standards.

Closing:

To be as charitable to the authors of this resolution as possible, I believe the BSA leaders attempted in good faith to find a compromise “silver-bullet” solution to their dilemma of national controversy and pressure from traditionalists and pro-gay right advocates trying to hold the program together. They likely felt that they had a clever strategy that could stop the persistent tide of pressure and criticism from gay-rights activists while still controlling and possibly influencing openly gay Boy Scouts for good. The problem and the blind spots of the BSA officials are with their lack of understanding regarding the unintended legal consequences or how crafty and relentless their real opponents are in the gay-rights movement. This is especially true regarding the very serious lawsuits which would come almost immediately after this resolution is adopted. These legal challenges will blow the door of the new rule open to every member of the BSA, including adults. There has been no mention of this in any statements or documents made available to members.

Additionally, the pro-resolution BSA officials completely misunderstand what it means to be “openly gay” as defined and experienced by that culture in America. They also have lost sight of the true mission of the BSA by playing word games and basing moral and ethical choices on polling instead of on the “timeless values” of the Scout Oath and Scout Law. They lacked the moral courage to just do what was right and defend their policy and the values that support it. Finally, instead of doing what was clearly in the best interest of the boys, they were willing to compromise the safety and security of our young people by creating a policy designed to try to reduce the intense criticism the BSA has received under the false guise of “not denying scouting to any boy.” If the resolution passes, Scouting will eventually wither and become a much weaker movement that will fade into American history. In order for the Boy Scouts of America to continue as the robust jewel of American culture, its delegates must “Vote No” to the proposed resolution.

The author of this OnMyHonor.Net response is John Stemberger, an Eagle Scout, a Vigil Honor member of the Order of the Arrow, a former Scoutmaster, a Lifetime N.E.S.A. member and a father with two sons in Scouting. He is also an AV-rated Orlando lawyer who practices in civil and constitutional litigation. 

An Open Letter to BSA Delegates: 10 Reasons to “Vote No” on the Resolution

1) The proposed BSA resolution is logically incoherent and morally and ethically inconsistent. Under the proposed change in policy, open homosexuality would be officially consistent with the Scouting code throughout a Boy Scout’s life until the moment he turns 18, when it suddenly becomes a problem. Under the policy when a 16- or 17-year-old “open and avowed” homosexual becomes an Eagle before his 18th birthday, right after he turns 18 he is removed from Scouting.  No troop leader would want to put himself in the position of enforcing such an irrational rule.  A de facto change in the rule against openly homosexual adult leaders would also occur almost immediately. This inconsistency between the membership policy of youth and adults will provoke a “non-discrimination lawsuit by gay-rights activists groups against the BSA in which the association rights established by the Supreme Court will no longer be available. (See #7 infra.)

2) Opening the Boy Scouts to boys who openly proclaim being sexually attracted to other boys and/or openly identify themselves as “gay” will inevitably create an increase of boy-on-boy sexual contact which will result in further public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse. BSA’s own Youth Protection videos indicate that “70% of abuse to boys is by teenagers”. Two-deep leadership will have to be at least three-deep for units with homosexual youth. The complexity of sleeping arrangements will create a myriad of social and liability challenges. Sexual awareness and harassment training will be required in all Scouting units.  The leaders setting forth the proposed policy clearly did not have the safety and security of the boys in the BSA as their paramount concern.

3) The proposal forces and requires every chartered Scouting unit, regardless of religious convictions, to accept “open and avowed homosexual” boys in their program. The proposed resolution is much worse than the original idea for a local option where each troop would decide whether to allow open homosexuality in its unit. This proposal fails to respect or reverence the religious beliefs, values and theology of the vast majority of Christian churches which charter well over 70% of all Scouting units.

4) If the proposal is enacted, it will gut a major percentage of human capital in the BSA and utterly devastate the program financially, socially and legally. Of the faith based Scouting units, the vast majority of them are Latter-day Saints, Methodists, Catholics or Southern Baptists. Despite what denominations may decide for political reasons, the majority of local churches that charter Scout units will not be able to embrace this policy without violating their religious convictions. The BSA’s own “Voice of the Scout” surveys provide solid evidence that tens- and possibly hundreds of thousands of parents and Scouts will leave the program if the proposal is adopted. The financial impact from such a significant membership loss would be enormous. Camps will close, executives will be let go and properties will be sold off as a result of the vast loss of finances from major donors, private foundations and declining membership.

5) The Resolution robs parents of the sole authority to raise issues of sex and sexuality with their kids. Parents should have the exclusive right to raise issues about sex and sexuality with their children in their own time and in their own way, in the privacy of their homes; not brought up by other older boys around a campfire. Allowing open homosexuality would inject a sensitive and highly-charged political issue into the heart of the BSA, against the wishes of the vast majority of parents. Under the longstanding current policy, boys who have a same-sex attraction are not banned or removed from the program unless they act out in a manner that distracts from the mission of the BSA.

6) The proposed policy directly contradicts the BSA’s comprehensive 2010-2012 study which unanimously concluded last summer that prohibiting “open and avowed homosexuality” was “the absolute best policy” for the Boy Scouts.  Only months after the BSA affirmed the policy that was clearly in the best interest of its boys, a handful of top BSA officials caved from the pressure and criticism they received from their own adult peers. What kind of message are we sending to young people when the adults trying to teach them to be “brave” cannot muster up the courage to stand up for the values that are clearly best for the BSA? Sadly, instead of looking out for what is best for the safety and security of the boys in the program, BSA’s top leadership was more concerned about what is popular in the polls taken outside the Scouting family. To try to undermine the results of the unanimous 2012 study, the 2013 Voice of the Scout national survey was a carefully crafted tool to persuade and “condition” those surveyed to the idea of openly gay BSA members.

7) The proposed resolution leaves Scouting units with no options or legal protection if they refuse to allow open homosexuality among the boys of their units. This proposed policy completely retreats from the principles hard-fought in the U.S. Supreme Court case BSA vs. Dale in 2000. The legal protection will be completely removed for both adults and youth members. Scout units which refuses to accept or abide by the new policy will either have their charter revoked by national BSA leadership or become fully exposed to legal attacks for alleged violations of nondiscrimination ordinances. Even though the proposed resolution would not apply to adults immediately, legal experts estimate the new rule will also extend to everyone in the BSA, including adults, within only a couple of years because of lawsuits that will be brought by gay-rights activists under state non-discrimination clauses around the country once a gay Boy Scout turns 18 and is removed from the program.   The resolution is the first step in a two-step process in the whole program.

8) The effect of the phrase “sexual preference” in the BSA resolution could be used by LGBT activists to push for transgendered girls in the BSA. If a biological girl “prefers” acting out as a transgendered boy, she must also be allowed into any Boy Scout troop. In October of 2011 the Girl Scouts admitted a 7-year-old boy named Bobby Montoya into their program who preferred to be treated as a girl. Because the vague and undefined phrase “sexual preference” is used in the resolution, it opens the door and requires Scout units to accept any sexual preference expressed.

9) The “whereas” clauses in the resolution are symbolic and not part of the actual proposed policy. While the Resolution includes some positive “Whereas” clauses designed to take the edge off of the new membership policy language by advocating for some type of moral purity, “Whereas” clauses have never been binding in contract law or in the legal construction of a resolution. The only words that will become part of the official membership policy are the 141 words after “NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT…”

10) Top BSA leaders completely ignored the collective wisdom of rank-and-file Scouting family members when they proposed this resolution. Nationwide the BSA’s official “Voice of the Scout” survey shows respondents support the current policy by a supermajority of 61% to 34%. This survey also showed:

The author of this open letter is John Stemberger, an Eagle Scout, a Vigil Honor member of the Order of the Arrow, a former Scoutmaster, a Lifetime N.E.S.A. member and a father with two sons in Scouting.  He is an AV-rated Orlando lawyer who practices in civil and constitutional litigation.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: boy; boyscouts; bsa; cub; gay; gender; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; onmyhonor; scouts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last
To: lavaroise

that;s what grates and pisses me off.

If they wanted their homosexual queer boy scouts then make their own club, but no yet again they have to force others to accept them, they go to the courts, they pretend they are victims and the media yet again covers for them.

There is noting normal or natural about them having sex with the same sex but if they want that then go in their bedroom.
They don’t though, they have to have parades, queer month pride, rainbow flags, WTH flags, how pathetic is that.
They infiltrate churches, schools, PTO’s, become judges and so called reporters.

They infiltrated the media and military and my oldest boy always wanted seals or marine recon but alas he is not joining now and will end the family tradition of serving and all because of these homosexuals who seem to want to tell everyone about how they have their sex.

I never see ay where I live but if I do then I won’t shut up to them as I;m so fed up of them destroying groups which stood for morals and tradition.

Military
churches
boy scouts

can;’t even watch a movie or program with out homosexuals being on parade.


61 posted on 05/26/2013 6:55:39 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: manc

——I had not even thought about girls now saying they’re boys who want to join the boy scouts.——

That bridge was crossed years ago. The girls must be 14 and join venture or explorer troops


62 posted on 05/26/2013 6:57:22 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....Obama Denies Role in Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

then they had better overturn this insanity before that year and the next President had better overturn the madness and PC in the military.

Rapes on men and woman have increased to record levels in the last two years, oh yea when don’t ask was overturned

then women in West point, women in combat, cross dressers allowed, homosexuals prancing about.

When will people speak out that it’s no coincidence that once all of this new social crap was implemented then the rapes have skyrocketed


63 posted on 05/26/2013 6:58:45 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

the boy scouts teaches to stand for what is right, to show bravery and independent thinking and then they do this.

How any mother or father can keep their boy in this group now while this policy is in place and flies in the face of everything the scouts teach.

They know 3 out of 4 of the country’s areas will see less membership and lose money but the one place where they will get money is the north east.

Basically north east business money blackmailed them and then bought them off and for that they will never get any money from me again nor will my boys serve with them anymore , just like my oldest who was to join seals or marine recon and now has said to hell with the military for this reason and how Obama and his thugs ignore the military


64 posted on 05/26/2013 7:08:31 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
Excellent arguments (completely ignored).

&&&

Deliberately ignored.

65 posted on 05/26/2013 7:08:58 AM PDT by Bigg Red (Restore us, O God of hosts; let your face shine, that we may be saved! -Ps80)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

not even public schools now, I know two kids who go to a private so called Christian school and they are taught to accept this perversion.

Ever see the teaching of the internet schooling for kids at home?

I have and it’s all left wing crap, the boy next door was telling me about history and I said HUH.
Asked him where he got his info and he said all kids who do home schooling with the course of the internet gets this info.

It was so left wing I was stunned even more so than a teacher at public plus you can’t even face an internet teacher, only call them so it’s harder for to even homeschool now than it used ot be .

Seems the left understood people homeschool and got their agenda on the course over the internet


66 posted on 05/26/2013 7:11:50 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: bert

bloody ell nothing is sacred anymore form these turd poking strap on wearers, NOTHING, makes me puke, seems eastern Europe or parts of it as the last bastions of normal folk


67 posted on 05/26/2013 7:13:22 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: DH

daughter left girl scouts , my oldest boy was to join seals or marine recon and now he wont join the military .

These institutions are losing good men and women , boys and girls because some deviants can’t keep their sex life private.


68 posted on 05/26/2013 7:14:54 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: manc

or perhaps East Tennessee


69 posted on 05/26/2013 7:23:58 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....Obama Denies Role in Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

It is all part of The Plan: Saw this on another thread

(First Published in Gay Community News, Feb. 15-21, 1987 and also put into the Congressional Record. Author - Michael Swift.)

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence—will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.


70 posted on 05/26/2013 7:24:16 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: bert

I wanted to move there, alas the misses won and we live here now but when the kids get older and get jobs maybe then.

My favorite place in America, all around the mountains.


71 posted on 05/26/2013 7:25:32 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: manc

Indeed.

Except for those teachers over the age of 55, teachers ( private and government) have been thoroughly indoctrinated in the Marxist and homosexual dominated colleges of education.

And....Conservatives allow this to continue and have not developed conservative alternatives. I stress that developing alternatives is essential because it is impossible to reform what now exists.


72 posted on 05/26/2013 7:37:02 AM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

I agree with EVERY WORD on what you wrote.

I know an older teacher who still works and she hates how the young ones do things. She told me how these young teachers try to be parents and feel sorry for certain kids, thus these kids get away with many things.

There are two younger teacher, meaning in their late 30’s who are very conservative, one woman teaches Biology and she tells her students at high school we did not come from monkeys and dismisses Darwin.

When I saw the internet teaching for home schoolers on history and it was all about islam being good I tried to get in touch with what is called the virtual school teacher over the phone and she told me how slavery still exists in south FL , how she wants to teach about islam as a peaceful religion etc.

I nearly blew a gasket but nothing will happen to her because of the internet homeschooling crap they have put out.


73 posted on 05/26/2013 7:48:33 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: manc
HOly crap, that is sick.

But, you can't deny 'em. They are doing everything they said they would with very little resistance.

74 posted on 05/26/2013 8:27:26 AM PDT by riri (Plannedopolis-look it up. It's how the elites plan for US to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: riri

remember the rules for communists too and then we see what I posted earlier.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

This is why I can’t understand why our side can’t mention any of this. We have their writings, their agenda and their desire to destroy America and her traditions.
Our side just shut up, the boy scouts, talk radio and other groups have sold out to big money from big companies from the north east.

If talk radio and others do not mention ay of this then we might as well turn the lights off on the America we knew and know

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”


75 posted on 05/26/2013 8:49:26 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: DH

You guys who were kids in the 1950s are so lucky.

That was an America I will never know.

I caught a fleeting glimpse of it in the 1970s. I turned to look and it was gone.

My children are all under 10. I’d give up all my childhood memories if it meant my kids could know such a time.


76 posted on 05/26/2013 9:13:53 AM PDT by servo1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: servo1969
You guys who were kids in the 1950s are so lucky.

That's why I laugh when the useful idiots say, "Whaddya wanna drag us all back to the 1950s?"

Uh, seems like it'd sure be an improvement over what we got going on here now.

77 posted on 05/26/2013 9:57:52 AM PDT by riri (Plannedopolis-look it up. It's how the elites plan for US to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: peggybac
"Why did this happen? I’m baffled.

In a word: money. Homosexual activists couldn't beat the BSA in court, so they took another tack: pressure the BSA's corporate sponsors... companies like Intel... who then threatened to cut off support for scouting unless they adopted a pro-homosexual policy. This scared BSA leadership sufficiently that they caved.
78 posted on 05/26/2013 12:43:22 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I am shocked that they caved in but I wonder if this doesn't come down to the red state, blue state phenomenon and the general taking over of anything that is big and national such as national charities—the Girl Scouts, for one—national corporations and Susan Kolman for the Cure, to name a few. The left never stops and they are in the large metropolitan areas where many of the charities such as United Way and the big corporate donors, not to mention the Democrats, are located.

If they want a culture war, they are certainly being very brazen and obvious about it but they will still keep denying it, that is part of the program. But traditional America will strike back. If they want to divide the country they can but we will not know-tow to them.

79 posted on 05/26/2013 1:28:38 PM PDT by cradle of freedom (Long live the Republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: riri

“..That’s why I laugh when the useful idiots say, “Whaddya wanna drag us all back to the 1950s?”

Uh, seems like it’d sure be an improvement over what we got going on here now.”

For sure!

I tell them morals are ageless.


80 posted on 05/26/2013 2:20:47 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson