Homosexual Groups Admit ‘10%’ Figure Is Wrong

Traditional Values Coalition ^ | Friday, May 09 @ 15:27:45 CDT | Traditional Values Coalition

[Remedy]

Summary: In fighting to overturn a Texas law against homosexual sodomy, homosexual activists have quietly admitted that their claim that 10% of the population is homosexual is wrong.

In what will go down as one of the most underreported stories of the year, homosexual activists fighting against a sodomy law in Texas have admitted in a legal brief that 10% of the population is not homosexual.

The 10% claim has been used for more than 20 years to push the homosexual agenda—and to recruit public school children into the homosexual deathstyle.

The admission that the 10% figure is wrong appeared in an obscure footnote in a legal brief filed by a coalition of homosexual groups in the Lawrence v. Texas case now before the Supreme Court.

The coalition consisted of 31 groups including: Human Rights Campaign, National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians and Gays, The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, and the People for the Way Foundation.

In a footnote on page 16 of this homosexual coalition’s legal brief, they admit that "2.8% percent of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual."

Our thanks to the Family Research Council for pointing out this footnote and exposing the fact that homosexuals are finally telling the truth about their numbers. To read FRC’s analysis of this controversy, click here: Family Research Council: CultureFacts: Culture Facts - April 4, 2003

Read TVC’s Homosexual Urban Legend, published last year on this subject: Exposed: The Myth That "10% Are Homosexual".

[ffusco]

Yet something immoral might not be illegal.

[ffusco]

What no links! ; )

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

You might also note that an extremely high percentage of homosexuals were recruited into that lifestyle...

[GraniteStateConservative]

Despite public consensus, there's nothing inherently just or fair about majority rule. In fact, one of the primary dangers of majority rule is that is confers an aura of legitimacy and respectability on acts that would otherwise be deemed tyrannical.

Americans should read the wise words of James Madison in Federalist Paper No. 10. There's no clearer statement that the Framers fashioned a republic and not a pure democracy. Our Constitution set limits on not only the power of the three branches of the federal government, it also set limits on the arbitrary will of the people that might be expressed through a majority vote. Madison said, "[M]easures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." And he's right.

--superpatriot Dr. Walter E. Williams

[elfman2]

"Yet something immoral might not be illegal."

No argument with that, the bar's higher for making it illegal, but that doesn't justify the phrase, "we can't legislate morality". It's our consensus on the most egregious moral violations that underpin our laws.

[longtermmemmory]

There is recruiting by the utilization of modeling behavior. The efforts to "normalize" the alternate lifestyle seeks to make it a viable choice for developing minds. This logically taps into a period of uncertainty that children experience. It is only common sense that encouraging as normal sexual deviancy will yield children who are willing to experiment. Consider the Boston Schools which had a relationship with GLSEN. The teachers were encouraging teenagers on how to experiment with lesbian sex. Parents should encourage their children to audio tape all classes where these "acceptance" classes are taught.

[kegler4]

"Rem is a homphobe."

You think maybe?

I'm not arguing that the post has no value at all. I can agree that homosexuals are trying to overcome people's disgust with the lifestyle. There's no question on that point.

But does that mean they're recruiting? Over my life I've had several good friends who were gay. I work with two now (that I know of). I've never known ANY of them to "recruit" or to even talk about their preference.

[Under the Radar]

Remedy, you are a joy and a blessing on Free Republic.

[ClearCase_guy]

They were always around, I imagine, just not visible.

I acknowledge that they've always been around. But what about the numbers? If the percentage is somewhat elastic, then one can posit a society (like ours) that openly tries to embrace the lifestyle, passes laws to help practitioners, and educates young people to believe that the lifestyle is perfectly fine and commendable. That society may end up with a homosexual population of 2.8%.

Now picture a society were homosexuals are scorned as potential child molesters, disease-ridden hedonists, who threatened crucial institutions such as marriage and traditional families. Such a society may end up with a homosexual population substantially below 2.8%

Now, which society is better off? Hint: think about lower rates of disease.

[MEGoody]

"nature does not make that many mistakes in a species"

Nature has nothing to do with it. It's something they choose to enter into, just like an alcoholic chooses to take that first drink, then becomes a social drinker, and so forth and so on.

[brownie]

In response to #62.

There is a big difference between being for anti-sodomy laws and being against finding a constitutional "right" to homosexual sex; or a constituional "right" for gay marriage; or for giving homosexuals preferences in law (hate crimes; discrimination laws) or promoting homosexualism (teaching our kids, i.e. "Heather has two mommies").

I'm not necessarily for the former, but definitely against the latter. People try to simplify this battle into being "out to get the gays" or being "pro-homosexual". I am not out to harass, phycially injure or purposefully discriminate against homosexuals. However, I am against creating another mysterious "Constitutional Right" and creating another minority group with extra benefits under the law. I am just as against other hate crime legislation, or other mysterious "Constitutional Rights", such as the "right" to abortion. I am against affirmative action for any group. I am against the manner in which most of today's discrimination laws have been written/interpreted.

Does this mean I am imposing my morality through legislation? I don't believe so.

[Taliesan]

My wife and I are addicted to the Home and Garden Network. I can report with some confidence that 94.7% of the decorators in their shows are gay men, and 89% of that sub-set have an unnatural fondness for purple.

[elfman2]

"You might also note that an extremely high percentage of homosexuals were recruited into that lifestyle..."

"Extremely high percentage"? "Recruited"? I don't know how one could measure that objectively, like with the separated at birth twin studies. (in #66) Like psychosis, I don't think being gay can be predicted the day you are born, but our minds and our sexuality's so complex, I doubt well understand it anytime soon.

[MEGoody]

"We can't legistlate morality."

Neither should we make immorality and easy, comfortable choice to make.

[longtermmemmory]

http://www.stevekaneshow.com/glsen.htm

contains link with audio files of what was being taught to teachers in order to encourage teenagers to experiment with sex.

[MEGoody]

Would you want your 6 year old to read a book called "Mikey has two daddies" or something like that? When he is 14, would you want him attending any kind of seminar that talks about different ways gays enjoy sex?

Not saying schools all over the country are doing that. Just wondering if you would want that kind of thing kept out of your local schools.

[ffusco]

You really thing any amount of propaganda is gonna turn folks gay?

I don't think a session of Clockwork Orange programming would be enuf for most folks I know.

[MEGoody]

"IF the homosexual population is 2.8%, then this will have been true (for the most part) all through history."

Actually, until very recently, a person living as a homosexual (meaning not taking on a partner of the opposite sex) could not reproduce. Therefore, if homosexuality were genetic, the numbers would decline and eventually, that 'gene' would be almost non-existent.

[Pearls Before Swine]

nature does not make that many mistakes in a species (one out of 50???) and survive..."

I beg to differ. I go out in the street, look to my left, look to my right, or just turn on the TV, and I see lots of "mistakes."

[BibChr]

You can guess what I call the channel, teasing my wife when she watches it. Don't have to change the first letters of the first two nouns.

Dan
<c8