I think he's trying too hard. He paints -- accurately, I think -- the mindset of homosexuals as being "delusional." They want to rationalize what they're doing. As for the honesty of what they say and do in pursuit of that rationalization: "Were his arguments persuasive? Frankly, I didn't care, and I don't believe most of McNeill's readers do either."
And that's it in a nutshell: the mere fact of having arguments (no matter how good or bad) is sufficient to further the delusion. Nothing more than that.
I have no doubt that some of what we see in the homosexual agenda really is as cynical as Mr. Lee paints it. Most of it, however, is much more easily explained by the idea that you've got folks who are trying really hard to stay deluded. The owners of Lobo's, for instance, are probably serious about offering their "honest" books for sale -- and probably a lot of those books actually get sold.
And you know this because you feel it, yes?
I uised to closely follow the arguments for the ordination of women to the priesthood in the Catholic Church. Like with the gays, there are a lot of bright, verbally agile advocates out there: there was a lot of fancy Biblical exegesis, and a lot of historical digging, reassembling, reassessing, reconfiguring.
Then one day, I heard a feminist nun give a supposedly Scriptural pro-women-priesthood talk. Another nun, sitting next to me in the audience, grinned and whispered to me, "That's what I love about Sr. Virginia Ann. She makes it all sound so plausible.
A little shock went through me when I realized that she herself didn't think it was true, and didn't even care whether it was true: it was enough, for her, that it was "plausible."
I think that it all goes back to an epistomological assumption, that there IS no Good or Evil, Right or Wrong, True or False: all there is is a struggle for power.
Of course, he speaks from many years of experience. Is your cynicism as well founded?
This was a very long piece and it never really strayed from its central theme that sex itself, the act, the chase, the culmination, the "afterglow", were the driving forces for the author and all those he personally encountered along his way.
Now, when he seems to feel that his journey has reached a point at which he may at least rest, he sets off again, this time in print, chaste and chastened but still fervid in his opinion that there must be passion to fuel his trip to make it worthwhile.
So, in his newfound passion to mend old fences and build new bridges, he careers back along his wrecked path, righteous and indignant at the same time, flinging the bits and scraps of his past behind him in the vain hope the road itself can be set right and made ready for the next traveler with a firmer foot.
The trouble is, the passion consumes him; there is no place for him to rest, one day he will simply stop searching, for his own feet will carry him no further.
I read it differently. I see this treatise as an expose of what the "homosexuals agenda" folks are thinking, but without trying to excuse or justify it. In that light, I believe the author has done himself, and hopefully others, a great service.