Gay/civil rights debate splits black leaders: Local rev bucks stand by NAACP
The Corrosive Effects of the Gay Left's Coup
Kevin McCullough: Same-sex marriage hot potato heats up
"Homosexual Marriage Doesn't Effect My Marriage" (VANITY)
It won’t work (Same-sex Marriage)
Will teens, young adults embrace same-sex ‘marriage’?
The reality is that man and woman are made for each other - physically, emotionally, mentally, spirityally. This is obvious, and is seen by most people. Same-sex attraction, therefore, is a contradiction of the natural order; and because marital love of a man and a woman is such a good thing, it follows that the contradiction of it in homosexual relationships is correspondingly bad. Evil is privation of good, so the greater the good, the worse the evil.
Homosexual relations are a parody of marriage with profound effects on those engaging in them. Just as the personal growth of a married couple is fostered by a good marriage, a warping of the personality results from homosexual relations.
Those involved in such relationships will find it hard to acknowledge the objective depravity of what they are doing. They find pleasure in their lifestyle, which easily prompts the delusion that it must be all right. And as time passes, they become more accustomed to that way of living, and more readily deceive themselves with the contention that it is normal.
However, the natural moral law can never be extinguished in a person; it is written in our hearts, as St. Paul points ou (Romans 2:15). It may become obscured; it may be denied; but it is never killed. So, a struggle goes on within the person who lives in a radically unnatural way, a struggle to repress the truth.
It becomes imperative, in the thinking of practicing homosexuals, to convince others that this lifestyle is normal and crush any opposition. But this can’t be done by rational argument, for it is an irrational position. It remains then, to avoid the real issues and appeal to emotion. Monica Hingston does it by talking about sensitivity and beauty and warmth. It can also be done by depicting the homosexual as unfairly discriminated against - as a member of a persecuted minority.
The urge to justify the unjustifiable is a major driving force in the promotion of homosexuality. It is an urge caused by the deep depravity of homosexual activity, a depravity that must be denied if the person is to retain some kind of fragile peace with himself or herself. The state of mind is manifested by irrationality and intolerance of opposition. It can’t stand people like Cardinal Pell who tell the truth.
"The homosexual cause has moved naturally from a plea for tolerance to cultural conquest. As Robert Reilly notes a society can withstand any number of person who try to advance their own moral disorders as public policy. But it cannot survive once it adopts the justifications for whose moral disorders as its own. This is what is at stake in the culture war...
For any individual, moral failure is hard to live with because of the rebuke of conscience. Habitual moral failure, what used to be called vice, can be lived with only by obliterating conscience through rationalization. When we rationalize, we convince ourselves that heretofore forbidden desires are permissible. We advance the reality of the desires over the reality of the moral order to which the desires should be subordinated. In our minds we replace the reality of moral order with something more congenial to the activity we are excusing. In short, we assert that bad is good...
It is often difficult to detect rationalizations when one is living directly under their influence, and so historical examples are useful. One of the clearest was offered at the Nuremberg trials by Dr. Karl Brandt, who had been in charge of the Nazi regime's Aktion T-4 euthanasia program. He said in his defense: “...when I said `yes' to euthanasia I did so with the deepest conviction, just as it is my conviction today, that it was right. Death can mean deliverance. Death is life.”
Unlike Dr. Brandt, most people recover from their rationalizations when remorse and reality set back in. But when morally disordered acts become the defining centerpiece of one's life, vice can permanently pervert reason. Entrenched moral aberrations then impel people to rationalize vice not only to themselves but to others as well. Thus rationalizations become an engine for revolutionary change that will affect society as a whole.
The power of rationalization drives the culture war, gives it its particular revolutionary character, and makes its advocates indefatigable. It may draw its energy from desperation, but it is all the more powerful for that. Since failed rationalization means self-recrimination, it must be avoided at all cost. For this reason, the differences over which the culture war is being fought are not subject to reasoned discourse. Persons protecting themselves by rationalizing are interested not in finding the truth, but in maintaining the illusion that allows them to continue their behavior. For them to succeed in this, everyone must accede to their rationalization. This is why revolutionary change is required. The necessity for self-justification requires the complicity of the whole culture. Holdouts cannot be tolerated because they are potential rebukes. The self-hatred, anger, and guilt that a person possessed of a functioning conscience would normally feel from doing wrong are redirected by the rationalization and projected upon society as a whole (if the society is healthy), or upon those in society who do not accept the rationalization.
The homosexual movement's rationalization is far more widely advanced in its claims. According to Jeffrey Levi, former executive director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, “We (homosexuals)_ are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a right to protection from wrong. We have a right - as heterosexuals have already - to see government and society affirm our lives.” Since only the act of sodomy differentiates an active homosexual from a heterosexual, homosexuals want “government and society” to affirm that sodomy is morally equivalent to the marital act. “Coming out of the closet” can only mean an assent on the level of moral principle to what would otherwise be considered morally disordered.
And so it must be. If you are going to center your public life on the private act of sodomy, you had better transform sodomy into a highly moral act. If sodomy is a moral disorder, it cannot be legitimately advanced on the legal or civil level. On the other hand, if it is a highly moral act, it should serve as the basis for marriage, family (adoption), and community. As a moral act, sodomy should be normative. If it is normative, it should be taught in our schools as a standard. In fact, homosexuality should be hieratic: active homosexuals should be ordained as priests. All of this is happening. It was predictable. The homosexual cause moved naturally from a plea for tolerance to cultural conquest. How successful that conquest has been can be seen in the poverty of the rhetoric of its opponents. In supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, the best one congressman could do was to say, “America is not yet ready for homosexual marriage,” as if we simply need a decent interval to adjust ourselves to its inevitable arrival.
The homosexual rationalization is so successful that even the campaign against AIDS is part of it, with its message that “everyone is at risk.” If everyone is at risk, the disease cannot be related to specific behavior. Yet homosexual acts are the single greatest risk factor in catching AIDS. This unpleasant fact invites unwelcome attention to the nature of homosexual acts, so it must be ignored."
Black caucus resists comparison of gay 'marriage' to civil rights
The black rapper 50 Cent used several anti-gay slurs in an April interview with Playboy magazine, but even so, a homosexual advocacy group has restrained its criticism of him -- even inviting him to "get to know the LGBT community."
The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) offered a relatively mild response to words uttered by rapper 50 Cent, in marked contrast to GLAAD's relentless attack on a conservative radio talk-show host several years ago. That talk show host - Dr. Laura Schlessinger - never said the words that 50 Cent did...
Dr. Laura's 'Rhetoric and Defamation'
In contrast to its gentle treatment of 50 Cent, GLAAD showed no such restraint in its three-year campaign against conservative talk show host Dr. Laura Schlesinger.
In a March 20, 2001 press release, GLAAD announced it had culminated its "three-year public education campaign against the rhetoric of talk-show host Laura Schlessinger."
The group hailed the cancellation of Schlessinger's TV show as a "major victory against defamation and anti-gay intolerance."
GLAAD said it launched its campaign against Schlessinger in 1998, when she "began using terms such as 'deviant,' 'disordered' and 'biological error' to describe gays and lesbians."
"In coalition with thousands of local activists from across the country, we have held Laura Schlessinger accountable for her defamation of our community," GLAAD Executive Director Joan M. Garry said at the time.
"And we've sent a strong message that we are no longer an easy target for prejudice. GLAAD hopes the cancellation of 'Dr. Laura' will make media corporations think twice about giving a platform to someone who promotes derision and exclusion. Such decisions will never go unchallenged."
GLAAD accused Dr. Laura of perpetuating misinformation and reinforcing damaging stereotypes about homosexuality (including the concept that homosexuals can choose to change their behavior).
Like many homosexual activists, GLAAD rejects the notion that homosexuals can be "converted" to heterosexuality. It calls the notion "dangerous."
According to GLAAD, "Schlessinger's attacks first came to GLAAD's attention in 1997 when she characterized homosexuality as a "biological faux pas" in her syndicated newspaper column. In February 1998 and March 1999, GLAAD Executive Director Joan M. Garry met with Schlessinger in an unproductive effort to educate her about the hurtful impact of her words. When Schlessinger signed with Paramount Domestic Television for a TV talk show in mid-1999, GLAAD launched a campaign to bring the topic of defamatory language into the national public consciousness."
The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation says it is "dedicated to promoting and ensuring fair, accurate and inclusive representation of people and events in the media as a means of eliminating homophobia and discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation."
When A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality was published last month, the book's publisher, InterVarsity Press, placed an advertisement for the book in the popular magazine Psychology Today.
Shortly after the ad appeared, a lesbian activist and psychotherapist named Betty Berzon contacted Psychology Today's editor Robert Epstein to express her outrage.
Berzon was incensed that the magazine would accept an advertisement for A Parent's Guide, a book which views homosexuality as a developmental condition rather than a core identity. Berzon claimed that Epstein's magazine should have refused to print the ad. She threatened to organize a boycott against the magazine, and then followed up by sending out a flurry of postings on gay and lesbian internet sites in order to gain support for an organized boycott...
A story about the conflict was published in the December 10th issue of the gay magazine The Advocate, by columnist Michelangelo Signorile.
"When the editor in chief of Psychology Today reveals his support for so-called conversion therapies to turn gays straight, what does that say about the state of American psychology?" asked Signorile"
Signorile then described Epstein and his work as editor of Psychology Today in unflattering terms. He said the editor was a publicity seeker who "might view such a position [advertising a non-gay-affirmative book] as an attention grabber."
However, Signorile warned, editor Epstein would do well to remember what the gay community had succeeded in doing not so long ago to Dr. Laura. In a series of acrimonious and very public protests, gay activists were instrumental in forcing Dr. Laura's television show off the air by flooding the airwaves, the print media, and the streets outside the TV studio with protests that frightened off her advertisers.
Dr. Epstein had published the advertisement for A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality, and expressed support for reorientation therapy for unwanted homosexuality, "perhaps not realizing," Signorile said, " that the last celebrity 'doctor' who stepped into the homosexuality debate with dubious assertions--Laura Schlessinger--soon saw her multi-million dollar career deflate, as gay activists supported successful advertiser boycotts of her show amid a bruising campaign against her."
Defending Dr. Laura and America
Senator Says LCR Puts Homosexual Agenda Before GOP Welfare ( FR Thread )
Institutionalized Heterosexism in Our Schools: A Guide to Understanding and Undoing It
From Denial to Denigration: Understanding Institutionalized Heterosexism in Our Schools
"... When describing incidents of discrimination or harassment against LGBT people, then, it may be more precise to use the terms anti-LGBT bias or hate acts. And when discussing the belief, held by so many, that homosexuality is "wrong" or "less than," it may be more accurate to use heterosexism, which can be understood as an overt or tacit bias against non-heterosexuals based on a belief in the superiority or, sometimes, the omnipresence of heterosexuality(2) and the notion that homosexuality is psychologically, spiritually, or morally wrong. Since this type of intolerance is frequently leveled against those perceived to be lesbian or gay due to gender expression that transgresses societal norms, heterosexism can also be understood as the assumption that a dual gender role system based on birth-assigned sex is natural and desirable. Heterosexism--though not a replacement for homophobia--is a broader term that does not imply the loathing the latter term suggests, and which can describe seemingly benign attitudes and behavior based on the belief that heterosexuality and a binary gender structure are the norm.(3)
... Institutionalized heterosexism exists at every level of society--from family roles to federal policy--and works to transmit inflexible cultural norms to a populace that unconsciously integrates them. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy, for example, excludes all gay men who have "engaged in any homosexual behavior since 1977" from giving blood(11) and the community instinctively assumes that such guidelines are in our best interest. Religious doctrine instructs followers to "love the sinner, but hate the sin" and flocks of parishioners unquestioningly accept that homosexuality is inherently depraved. Pentagon policy(12) assures us that not asking or telling is the best way to deal with our LGBT service members and the public takes for granted that silence is golden..."
"NEW YORK - June 26, 2003 The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, today hailed the U. S. Supreme Court’s decision finding the Texas sodomy law unconstitutional, discriminatory and an unwarranted invasion of privacy. In a concurrent 5-4 decision, the Court overturned the basis for all remaining sodomy laws, and, according to GLSEN, these decisions will bolster efforts to ensure the safety of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students.
Today’s historic ruling affirms the equality of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people before the law and sends a powerful message to LGBT youth," said Executive Director Kevin Jennings..."
Lawrence v. Texas ensures the safety of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students in public schools????
Topic three: gay marriage. Homosexual activists are unequaled in both the length and volume of their op-ed mental snaps. They too wish me death by dismemberment, preferably early on, and also hurl curses, but they are Energizer Bunnies. They go on and on and on. Columns from 5 years ago still bring hate mail. Rational discussions or thoughtful rebukes are welcomed, even at 5 years out, but childish attacks grow tiresome. One homosexual correspondent insists that my data on homosexual men having higher education levels are skewed. This chap fervently argues, "The dumb ones stay in the closet."
These groups have three tactics in common: emotion, not rational thought; facts, science, or studies be damned; and hatred toward those who disagree. Gay rights activists have one more trait - they harass the employers of their opponents. Applying economic pressure, they obtain agreement, or, at a minimum, silence. They preach tolerance and acceptance, but are, oddly, totalitarians. I cannot speak for the views of my correspondent's doofuses in the closet.
The rash of defiant homosexual marriages and judicial usurpation of public policy formulation on marriage are further evidence of the gay movement's totalitarian nature. The slumbering and subservient public has finally awakened to the homosexual movement's usurpation of process through press-starved politicos and courts that relish end-runs.
Cornering straights and frightening them into submission is the gay modus operandi. An entire nation is now backed into a corner with the U.S. Constitution's full faith and credit clause serving as one wall and the borrowed emotion of the civil rights movement as the other.
Judicial, media, economic and political forces have allowed the gay movement to run roughshod over complacent straights. Forced silence on the parts of the straights now finds gay marriage an inevitability. I predicted as much years ago. I write now with one additional thought that accompanies policies totalitarians impose: bad idea...
Parents of first-grade girl angered by children's book about gay princes
Selma to San Francisco?--Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue.
We had a former homosexual speaker at our church a couple of years ago who presented an insider's view of the homosexual community. Amazing but very disturbing presentation.
171 posted on 03/18/2004 2:07:36 PM PST by MississippiMan:
The guy was HIV-positive. I can't remember what kind of job he was in as a late teenager, but it was something that landed him in a party crowd, and in very short order this straight (and obviously gullible) guy was convinced that he was really a homosexual who just didn't know it yet, and was inducted into the lifestyle. He talked about the incredible promiscuity, the outright conscious strategy-based recruitment of children, the orgies, the staggering teenage male prostitution, etc.
Thank you for posting this information. As we are well aware, homosexual recruiting is a serious problem, and this information provides additional documentation of that fact, as well as the fact that homosexual behavior is chosen.
Seven Steps to Recruit-proof Your Child
Recruit-proof your child against homosexuality
National Coming-Out Day is a day that those who are engaging in homosexuality are encouraged to announce that fact to their families, friends, employers and anyone else who will listen. It is a day that many parents fear.
If you haven't adequately educated your child about sexuality, he or she could be vulnerable, and once involved with homosexuality, escape can be difficult. Author Scott Lively has written a guide for parents who want to be pro-active called "Seven Steps to Recruit-Proof your Child." Perhaps the most important step is to understand that gay activists do recruit and that your children are at risk.
When most parents think of recruitment, they see it as the seduction of an innocent perhaps emotionally vulnerable child or youth by an older sexual predator. Today this recruitment takes place in hundreds of different ways. Gay propagandists bring their message to our children through television programs, movies, music, advertising, and through public education classrooms. Our parents never would have put up with "gay" activists coming into the schools to talk about their lifestyle, but this has become an everyday occurrence.
These sessions are no longer confined to junior high and high schools. A training video called "It's Elementary" teaches elementary school teachers how to get the "gay" message into primary grade classrooms. Books like "Daddy's Roommate" and "Heather Has Two Mommies" are all too commonplace. The National Education Association, the nation's largest teacher's union, has openly adopted guidelines for promoting homosexuality in public education and many private schools already have yielded to the pressure to present homosexuality as a normal.
Imagine what goes through the minds of 12-year-old boys and girls when a gay activist tells them that 10 percent of the population is gay, and that 10 percent of their class has this "sexual orientation." At this tender age, classrooms of teenagers and pre-teenagers, with their hormones raging, are being encouraged to follow their urges and experiment. If a child voices a question about the possibility of being gay to a teacher or other school officials, the parent most likely never will hear about it. These children often are referred to an outside "gay" counseling center run by active homosexuals.
It is more important than ever before that parents talk to their teenagers and pre-teenagers about homosexuality in a factual, but compassionate way. There is no scientific proof that one is born homosexual. It is a movement grounded in politics not science. In 1973, homosexuality was removed from the American Psychiatric Association's official list of disorders, not as a result of any scientific breakthrough, but by a campaign of intimidation and harassment. An independent poll of APA members conducted at the time showed that an overwhelming majority considered it to be a treatable disorder. Under continued pressure from homosexual activists, the APA subsequently voted to "normalize" sadomasochism and pedophilia.
Another important message to give your child, is that help is available for those who stumble. One is not born gay, and one does not have to remain in the gay lifestyle. If you need further information contact Exodus International at 206-784-7799.
Parental Notification Laws regarding Gay & Lesbian Programs for Youths?
There is no shame in believing a lie until you learn the truth.
The success of so-called "gay rights" is an amazing triumph of clever deception over simple logic. When it comes to this issue, otherwise intelligent people routinely fall for arguments that just don't hold up under scrutiny. "Gay" sympathizers aren't necessarily more gullible than other people, they are simply tricked into accepting certain conclusions without first examining the underlying premises.
He who defines the terms controls the debate -- and by extension, public opinion. On this issue the terms have been defined (in many cases invented) by the talented sophists of the "gay" movement.
Sophistry, it must be noted, is the ancient Greek art of persuasion by subtly false reasoning. The key to overcoming sophistry is to simplify and clarify what the sophists have intentionally made complex and vague. That process begins by defining the terms and concepts being used in the arguments. One quickly discovers that most arguments advocating "gay rights" depend upon hidden false assumptions and deliberately ambiguous terms. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Among the most common terms and concepts in the "gay rights" debate are: homosexuality, sexual orientation, heterosexism, diversity, multi-culturalism, inclusiveness, discrimination, homophobia and tolerance. These words and phrases are used by "gay" sophists to frame the question of homosexuality as a civil rights issue. It is a context chosen to favor homosexuals to the extent that they cast themselves as victims and their opponents as oppressors, yet even within this context, "gay" arguments are easily refuted...
According to a March 10 editorial masquerading as a news story in The Washington Post, the paper's most recent poll found that a majority of Americans "reject(s) amending the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriages in favor of allowing states to make their own laws." Having just seen a CBS News poll suggesting an entirely opposite public sentiment, my first reaction was to compare the wording of the respective questions. My suspicions were confirmed. The Post led respondents to its desired answer by manipulating the question...
The devil is in the false dilemma posed by the Post. The choice they offer is tendentious and misleading, exploiting the fact that most respondents probably aren't sufficiently informed on the nuances of the issue to recognize the ploy.
Supporters of various versions of a federal marriage amendment aren't proactive. They're reactive. The fight was initiated by gay activists plying liberal judges to force the issue. The first counterattack was the Defense of Marriage Act, passed overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996.
The Defense of Marriage Act didn't ban same-sex marriage at the state level, but defined it under federal law as the union only of a man and a woman. The Defense of Marriage Act also sought to inoculate individual states from the provisions of the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution which might be interpreted to require every state to recognize same-sex marriages certified in any state.
The Defense of Marriage Act is the next target of gay activists, who will seek to have it overturned in the courts. In anticipation of that, the federal marriage amendment is a goal-line defense to protect individual states from being forced by federal or local courts to legally recognize same-sex marriages imposed on other states by their local courts.
The recent spate of same-sex marriages, in blatant defiance of local law, performed by sympathetic mayors in places like San Francisco is intended to further escalate the battle in the courts, the only venue where gay activists feel they can win. At the same time, this has heightened the sense of urgency for federal marriage amendment supporters...
"...Kindergartners are learning about "homophobia" as lessons about alternative lifestyles and homosexuality appear in America's elementary schools -- often without parental knowledge....
A Seattle school board member and official with the National School Boards' Association thinks third-graders are too young for a discussion of the pros and cons of homosexual marriage. "Third-graders should not be asked to contemplate something that deep and complex," says Michael Preston, chairman of the NSBA's Council of Urban Boards of Education. "I'm sure they should be allowed to marry, but I've come to that conclusion as an adult and it's not something I'd even care to think about as a third-grader."... "But you have to consider the age appropriateness of the subject matter. Young minds are sometimes like clay. We need to allow children to be children and not overly influence what they end up thinking about something." ..."
"... A prominent psychiatrist says the sex-ed curricula at these schools can lower children "to the level of animals" and inflict lasting harm. "Massachusetts schools' systematic promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity fosters sexual confusion and experimentation," says Nathaniel S. Lehrman, former clinical director of the Kingsboro Psychiatric Center in New York. "They dilute and trivialize [the capacity for] faithful sexual passion which should [later] be the cement of these children's marriages. Unstable youngsters may become particularly vulnerable to homosexuals who actively recruit them."
There are teachers all over North America quietly mainstreaming homosexual behavior to children as young as 5 years old. As widely reported, on "Gay Days" classes are cancelled and students led to compulsory activities where homosexuals explain their "lifestyles." The mind-control techniques are straight from Soviet schools..."
Youth support sex ed:Students call on government to look beyond abstinence-only
Gays in Society: The Growing Clash
Courage and compassion on homosexuality
With an eye for the future, the battleground for gay activists is in the schools and children are the targets, a new book, The Homosexual Agenda reveals, while developments in at least one state capitol seem to bear the authors out.
Quoted in the book is a rallying point from a 1999 Gay Lesbian Straight Educational Network (GLSEN) conference:
The fear of the religious right is that the schools of today will be the governments of tomorrow. And you know, they're right. If we do our jobs right, we're going to raise a generation of kids who don't believe the claims of the religious right.
The authors of the book, Alan Sears and Craig Osten describe a phenomenon that does more than threaten religious freedom. The 'sexual orientation community' is actively working to impose their value system upon the rest of society. The chapter entitled "Stupid Parents, 'Enlightened Kids'" is of particular interest to those who are concerned about childhood indoctrination.
Sears and Osten quote homosexual activist Chuck Jones: "This is war, so act accordingly." How is this war waged in the classroom? Gay orthodoxy is being imposed upon minor children in class as undisputable fact, rather then even the subject of controversy or debate.
A high school boy found himself made fodder for ridicule when he questioned a biology teacher's assertion that homosexuality is genetic: "What's the matter, Kyle? Are you unsure of your sexuality?" As the other students laughed, the teacher went on, "did you know that the people who scream the loudest turn out to be gay themselves?"
In The Homosexual Agenda, Sears and Osten report that the nation's largest teachers' union, the National Education Association, is enthusiastically developing programs to incorporate the gay agenda into public school curricula for children of all ages. Many of them are in place today and have been for some years now.
"GLSEN regularly collaborates with other national education organizations to broaden the reach of our message and materials," the lobbying groups executive director, Kevin Jennings writes in a recent fundraising letter.
"For example, last year we helped the National Education Association-the nation's largest teacher's union with 2.7 million members-pass sweeping new policies directing its members to address lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in their work."
Agendized educators are exploiting the confusion that characterizes normal adolescence, according to Craig and Osten in The Homosexual Agenda. . "As bodies change and hormones rage," the authors explain, youths are told that their feelings may indicate that they are bisexual. Further, heterosexuality is portrayed as being passé, while 'alternative' sexuality is promoted as chic and more likely to result in peer acceptance.
Organizations such as the aforementioned GLSEN are targeting children for gay advocacy participation, Sears and Osten point out. The book describes a Day of Silence that GLSEN orchestrates every year, wherein students are not to speak. Instead they are to present a card explaining that they will not speak that day in support of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people.
Children are told that friends and family members who hold that homosexuality is wrong should be considered enemies and treated as such, according to research done by the authors. Alienating children from their family and indoctrinating them in school is a small price to pay if the Homosexual Agenda is to be realized, the authors conclude. Sears and Osten head the Alliance Defense Fund.