Posted on 07/06/2003 9:05:02 AM PDT by mrustow
In their quest to "queer" America, radical homosexual activists in the media destroy lives, as they manipulate the principle of privacy, and make war on traditional masculinity, sports, and even the truth.
In late April, Sen. Rick Santorum (R, Pa.) got a taste of what awaits anyone who opposes the gay agenda. After explaining to Associated Press reporter Lara Jakes Jordan (who is married to Sen. John Kerry’s (D, Ma.) campaign manager, Jim Jordan) his opposition to any pro-gay laws or court rulings that might weaken the family, gay activists demanded that Santorum resign.
But the Santorum case was only the tip of the iceberg. For as Sandy Koufax, Mike Piazza, and countless others will attest, in recent years, gay activists have graduated from protesting against public figures to controlling news rooms. The activists do not care if their stories are even true, and suffer no consequences for lying.
In February, Hall of Fame pitcher Sandy Koufax ended his 48-year relationship with the Los Angeles Dodgers, due to a defamatory story a reporter planted in the New York Post, insinuating that Koufax was a homosexual. The Dodgers and the New York Post both belong to News Corp., the conglomerate owned by Australian media mogul Rupert Murdoch.
The story, a "blind item" in Richard Johnson’s Page Six gossip section, referred to "an unidentified 'Hall of Fame baseball hero" who was secretly gay. The December 19 item claimed that the baseball great "cooperated with a best-selling biography only because the author promised to keep it secret that he is gay. The author kept her word, but big mouths at the publishing house can't keep from flapping."
Since the bestselling biography, Sandy Koufax: A Lefty's Legacy by Jane Leavy, had appeared only three months earlier -- published by News Corp. subsidiary HarperCollins! -- many observers concluded that the "blind item" referred to Koufax. On February 21, the New York Post's management confessed that the piece had indeed been about the 66-year-old pitcher. "A two- sentence blind item we ran here on Dec. 19 about a 'Hall of Fame baseball hero' has sparked a series of unfortunate consequences for which we are very sorry.... We apologize to both Koufax and Leavy for getting it wrong."
The New York Daily News reported on February 22, that "Daily News columnist Michael Gross tracked down the twice-married Koufax and his current girlfriend and made clear that the Dodger great is heterosexual.”
The report went beyond even the radical homosexual "outing" of famous closeted gays, a practice which was pioneered in 1989 by editor-in-chief, Gabriel Rotello, and violent "reporter," Michelangelo Signorile, of the short-lived magazine Outweek. In 1990, Rotello sought to rationalize the practice, writing that, "social workers pointed out that gay teens grow up without support networks of parents, relatives or even 'out' gay and lesbian friends. Such kids, who are taught the lie that gays are pathetic, sad and hopeless, desperately need positive role models. Despite the fact that thousands of society's most famous, respected and successful people are gay, gay kids grow up without that knowledge." Rotello considered his tactic vindicated, when supermarket tabloids soon began imitating it.
The gay mafia -- openly gay activists who pass as journalists -- seeks to "out" high-profile, professional athletes as homosexual, in order to mainstream a sexual orientation which most Americans consider perverted, and apparently as an assault on the last preserve of the traditional masculinity they have declared war on. And if no gay superstars are handy, activists will invent some.
Once the preserve of despised storm troopers like Rotello and Signorile, the practice of "outing" has since gone mainstream, as activists have taken over major media outlets. However, even bigger problems with the "queering" of the news involve the willful misreporting or outright silencing of important stories.
In June 2000, media watchdog Reed Irvine reported in NewsMax.com on the celebratory speech given at the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association by New York Times national political correspondent, Richard Berke. "Now, there are times when you look at the [Times'] front-page meeting and ... literally three-quarters of the people deciding what’s on the front page are not-so-closeted homosexuals."
In a whispering campaign last year, reporters portrayed New York Mets catcher Mike Piazza as homosexual. Piazza, widely considered a surefire future Hall of Famer, eventually felt the need to call a press conference, to announce that he is "not gay."
Gay media activists have also succeeded at perpetrating hoaxes, according to which heterosexuals are just as much at risk of contracting HIV as homosexuals, and that gays comprise 10% of the population, and are victimized by rampant anti-gay attacks.
In 1990, investigative journalist Michael Fumento's book, The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, meticulously proved that AIDS was a gay disease. Fumento revealed that public health officials, in league with homosexual activists, routinely lied about the danger of AIDS to the heterosexual population, and thus misused scarce resources, costing many lives that could have been saved. Gay activists felt so threatened by Fumento, that they intimidated his publisher into killing the book’s PR campaign, thus ensuring that it was a commercial failure, and succeeded at marginalizing one of America's finest journalists.
In seeking to mainstream homosexuality, the gay mafia has for years spread the fiction that "every tenth" person is homosexual. More sober calculations, such as those of SUNY Stony Brook sociologist John Gagnon, put the prevalence of homosexuality at 2%.
In 1991, New York Newsday columnist Jim Dwyer wrote of the near-lynching of a heterosexual man by a homosexual mob at the annual New York City Gay Pride parade. The man had muttered to his girlfriend about the aggressive attitude of the "fags" at the parade. A nearby spectator overheard him, and organized a lynch mob, which chased after the man. A police officer saved the man, by putting him in a taxicab that sped from the scene. No members of the mob were arrested.
Dwyer alone reported on the incident. Local media outlets all reported, however, on three thugs who were arrested at the parade, for attempting to attack homosexuals with baseball bats. And so, instead of showing that homosexuals were both attackers and victims that day, the media portrayed them exclusively as victims.
During the 1990s in New York State, thousands of babies and their mothers died horrible, preventable deaths due to AIDS, because the gay mafia, which controlled AIDS coverage, refused to report on a gruesome policy that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had adopted, under pressure from the gay lobby. All newborns were routinely tested for HIV infection, but contrary to established public health practice, CDC officials refused to inform their mothers of the results. While only 25% of the children of HIV+ mothers were born with HIV antibodies, thousands more were then infected via their mother's breast milk. As State Assemblywoman Nettie Mayersohn wrote in 1997, "Only in the world of AIDS has privacy and secrecy been given a higher priority than prevention and treatment." But then, gay activists do not have children.
Another dramatic case of the gay mafia's ability to skew the news came following the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, in Laramie, Wyoming. Posing as gays, Aaron J. McKinney and Russell Henderson lured Shepard away from a bar, robbed and pistol-whipped him, and tied him to a fence. Shepard was found alive, but died five days later. Henderson and McKinney are serving life sentences.
As William McGowan points out in Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity Has Corrupted American Journalism (which the New York Times refused to review), no less than 3,007 stories on the Shepard case were published in the first MONTH after the murder. Across America, pro-gay and gay reporters, and gay activists seized upon the case as typical of rampant "homophobia," exploiting it to win political privileges for homosexuals, including "hate crime" legislation giving gay crime victims special status.
In 1999, a young boy was heinously murdered, but since the crime was carried out by homosexual pedophiles, most Americans never heard about it. Don Carpenter and Joshua Macabe Brown lured 13-year-old neighbor Jesse Dirkhising into their apartment in Rogers, Arkansas, where they tied up, gagged, and drugged him. As Allyson Smith reported in World Net Daily, for five hours, Brown anally raped the boy with sausages and cucumbers, "three fingers, his penis, a frozen banana, and a urine enema laced with the sedative drug amitryptiline while Carpenter watched, masturbating ..."
Leaving their victim face down, the men took breaks to eat, shop for more rape implements, and nap, while he slowly succumbed. According to Medical Examiner Dr. Stephen Erickson, young Jesse died of "suffocation, positional asphyxiation and acute amitryptiline intoxication."
As William McGowan reports, in the month after Jesse Dirkhising's murder, only 46 stories were devoted to his fate. "The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC ignored the story altogether and continued to do so through the March 2001 trial of one of the murderers, which resulted in a conviction. (The other assailant later pled guilty.)" Dirkhising's murderers are now fighting their convictions.
Ultimately, the gay mafia does allow for one last preserve of "privacy": Keeping important but unflattering stories about homosexuals very, very private.
Most of us fail to understand why anyone would want to engage in homosexual activity. To the average person, the very idea is either puzzling or repugnant.
Indeed, a recent survey (1) indicated that only 14% of men and 10% of women imagined that such behavior could hold any "possibility of enjoyment."
The peculiar nature of homosexual desire has led some people to conclude that this urge must be innate: that a certain number of people are "born that way," that sexual preferences cannot be changed or even ended. What does the best research really indicate? Are homosexual proclivities natural or irresistible?
At least three answers seem possible.
The first, the answer of tradition, is as follows: homosexual behavior is a bad habit that people fall into because they are sexually permissive and experimental. This view holds rat homosexuals choose their lifestyle as the result of self-indulgence and an unwillingness to play by society rules.
The second position is held by a number of psychoanalysts (e.g., Bieber, Socarides). According to them, homosexual behavior is a mental illness, symptomatic of arrested development. They believe that homosexuals have unnatural or perverse desires as a consequence of poor familial relations in childhood or some other trauma.
The third view is "biological" and holds that such desires are genetic or hormonal in origin, and that there is no choice involved and no "childhood trauma" necessary.
Which of these views is most consistent with the facts? Which tells us the most about homosexual behavior and its origins? The answer seems to be that homosexual behavior is learned. The following seven lines of evidence support such a conclusion.
1) No researcher has found provable biological or genitic differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals that weren't caused by their behavior
Occasionally you may read about a scientific study that suggests that homosexuality is an inherited tendency, but such studies have usually been discounted after careful scrutiny or attempts at replication. No one has found a single heredible genetic, hormonal or physical difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals - at least none that is replicable. (9, 12) While the absence of such a discovery doesn't prove at inherited sexual tendencies aren't possible, it suggests that none has been found because none exists.
2) People tend to believe that their sexual desires and behaviors are learned
Two large studies asked homosexual respondents to explain the origins of their desires and behaviors - how they "got that way." The first of these studies was conducted by Kinsey in the 1940s and involved 1700 homosexuals. The second, in 1970, (4) involved 979 homosexuals. Both were conducted prior to the period when the "gay rights" movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins. Both reported essentially the same findings: Homosexuals overwhelmingly believed their feelings and behavior were the result of social or environmental influences.
In a 1983 study conducted by the Family Research Institute (5) (FRI) involving a random sample of 147 homosexuals, 35% said their sexual desires were hereditary. Interestingly, almost 80% of the 3,400 heterosexuals in the same study said that their preferences and behavior were learned (see Table 1 below).
Table 1
Reasons For Preferring: homosexuality (1940s and 1970)
*early homosexual experience(s) with adults and/or peers - 22%
*homosexual friends/ around homosexuals a lot - 16%
*poor relationship with mother - 15%
*unusual development (was a sissy, artistic, couldn't get along with own sex, tom-boy, et cetera) - 15%
*poor relationship with father - 14%
*heterosexual partners unavailable - 12%
*social ineptitude - 9%
*born that way - 9%
heterosexuality (1983)
*I was around heterosexuals a lot - 39%
*society teaches heterosexuality and I responded - 34%
*born that way - 22%
*my parents, marriage was so good I wanted to have what they had - 21%
*I tried it and liked it - 12%
*childhood heterosexual experiences with peers it was the ''in thing" in my crowd - 9%
*I was seduced by a heterosexual adult - 5%
While these results aren't conclusive, they tell something about the very recent tendency to believe that homosexual behavior is inherited or biologic. From the 1930s (when Kinsey started collecting data) to the early 1970s, before a "politically correct" answer emerged, only about 10% of homosexuals claimed they were "born that way." Heterosexuals apparently continue to believe that their behavior is primarily a result of social conditioning.
3) Older homosexuals often approach the young
There is evidence that homosexuality, like drug use is "handed down" from older individuals. The first homosexual encounter is usually initiated by an older person. In separate studies 60%, (6) 64%, (3) and 61% (10) of the respondents claimed that their first partner was someone older who initiated the sexual experience.
How this happens is suggested by a nationwide random study from Britain: (17) 35% of boys and 9% of girl said they were approached for sex by adult homosexuals. Whether for attention, curiosity, or by force, 2% of the boys and 1% of the girls succumbed. In the US, (1) 37% of males and 9% of females reported having been approached for homosexual sex (65% of those doing the inviting were older). Likewise, a study of over 400 London teenagers reported that "for the boys, their first homosexual experience was very likely with someone older: half the boys' first partner were 20 or older; for girls it was 43 percent." (13) A quarter of homosexuals have admitted to sex with children and underaged teens, (6,5,8) suggesting the homosexuality is introduced to youngsters the same way other behaviors are learned - by experience.
4) Early homosexual experiences influence adult patterns of behavior
In the 1980s, scholars (12) examined the early Kinsey data to determine whether or not childhood sexual experiences predicted adult behavior. The results were significant: Homosexual experience in the early year, particularly if it was one's first sexual experience - was a strong predictor of adult homosexual behavior, both for males and females. A similar pattern appeared in the 1970 Kinsey Institute (4) study: there was a strong relationship between those whose first experience was homosexual and those who practiced homosexuality in later life. In the FRI study (5) two-thirds of the boys whose first experience was homosexual engaged in homosexual behavior as adults; 95% of those whose first experience was heterosexual were likewise heterosexual in their adult behavior. A similarly progressive pattern of sexual behavior was reported for females.
It is remarkable that the three largest empirical studies of the question showed essentially the same pattern. A child's first sexual experiences were strongly associated with his or her adult behavior.
5) Sexual conduct is influenced by cultural factors - especially religious convictions
Kinsey reported "less homosexual activity among devout groups whether they be Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish, and more homosexual activity among religiously less active groups." (2) The 1983 FRI study found those raised in irreligious homes to be over 4 times more likely to become homosexual than those from devout homes. These studies suggest that when people believe strongly that homosexual behavior is immoral, they are significantly less apt to be involved in such activity.
Recently, because of the AIDS epidemic, it has been discovered that, relative to white males, twice as many black males are homosexual (14) and 4 times as many are bisexual. Perhaps it is related to the fact that 62% of black versus 17% of white children are being raised in fatherless homes. But even the worst racist wouldn't suggest that it is due to genetic predisposition.
Were homosexual impulses truly inherited, we should be unable to find differences in homosexual practice due to religious upbringing or racial sub-culture.
6) Many change their sexual preferences
In a large random sample (5) 88% of women currently claiming lesbian attraction and 73% of men claiming to currently enjoy homosexual sex, said that they had been sexually aroused by the opposite sex,
85% of these "lesbians" and 54% of these "homosexuals" reported sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex in adulthood,
67% of lesbians and 54% of homosexuals reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex, and 82% of lesbians and 66% of homosexuals reported having been in love with a member of the opposite sex.
Homosexuals experiment. They feel some normal impulses. Most have been sexually aroused by, had sexual relations with, and even fallen in love with someone of the opposite sex.
Nationwide random samples (11) of 904 men were asked about their sex lives since age 21, and more specifically, in the last year. As the figure reveals, 1.3% reported sex with men in the past year and 5.2% at some time in adulthood. Less than 1% of men had only had sex with men during their lives. And 6 of every 7 who had had sex with men, also reported sex with women.
It's a much different story with inherited characteristics. Race and gender are not optional lifestyles. They remain immutable. The switching and experimentation demonstrated in these two studies identifies homosexuality as a preference, not an inevitability.
7) There are many ex-homosexuals
Many engage in one or two homosexual experiences and never do it again–a pattern reported for a third of the males with homosexual experience in one study. (1) And then there are ex-homosexuals - those who have continued in homosexual liaisons for a number of years and then chose to change not only their habits, but also the object of their desire. Sometimes this alteration occurs as the result of psychotherapy; (10) in others it is prompted by a religious or spiritual conversion. (18) Similar to the kinds of "cures" achieved by drug addicts and alcoholics, these treatments do not always remove homosexual desire or temptation. Whatever the mechanism, in a 1984 study (5) almost 2% of heterosexuals reported that at one time they considered themselves to be homosexual. It is clear that a substantial number of people are reconsidering their sexual preferences at any given time.
What causes homosexual desire?
If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences do cause strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:
1. Homosexual experience:
any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult
any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).
2. Family abnormality, including the following: a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother an absent, distant, or rejecting father a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister the lack of a religious home environment divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults parents who model unconventional sex roles condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle
3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:
precocious or excessive masturbation exposure to pornography in childhood depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals) or girls, sexual interaction with adult males
4. Cultural influences:
a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration pro-homosexual sex education openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher) societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior
Can homosexuality be changed?
Certainly. As noted above, many people have turned away from homosexuality - almost as many people call themselves "gay."
Clearly the easier problem to eliminate is homosexual behavior. Just as many heterosexuals control their desires to engage in premarital or extramarital sex, so some with homosexual desires discipline themselves to abstain from homosexual contact.
One thing seems to stand out: Associations are all-important. Anyone who wants to abstain from homosexual behavior should avoid the company of practicing homosexuals. There are organizations including "ex-gay ministries, " (18) designed to help those who wish to reform their conduct. Psychotherapy claims about a 30% cure rate, and religious commitment seems to be the most helpful factor in avoiding homosexual habits.
Family Research Institute PO Box 62640 Colorado Springs, CO 80962 Phone: (303) 681-3113
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet1.html
Many change their sexual preferences In a large random sample (5) 88% of women currently claiming lesbian attraction and 73% of men claiming to currently enjoy homosexual sex, said that they had been sexually aroused by the opposite sex,
85% of these "lesbians" and 54% of these "homosexuals" reported sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex in adulthood, 67% of lesbians and 54% of homosexuals reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex, and 82% of lesbians and 66% of homosexuals reported having been in love with a member of the opposite sex.
Now, this is interesting.
OK. If the Supreme Court ruled that there is NO 'sodomy' law, then Jesse died in a private/personal act. RIGHT?
Considering how awful the USSC has been in general, and as bad as certain sitting courts and individual justices have been, it's hard for a justice to attain notoriety for mental and moral incompetence. And yet, Sandra Day O'Connor has done just that! She will go down in the annals of the Court as one of the worst justices ever. She doesn't even seem to be hostile towards the Constitution; rather, she would appear to lead an life oblivious to it, in a separate, parallel universe.
Envision the day when the public finds its sanity & then goes absolutely nuts on the skulls of these warped SOBs who've declared war on the nation.
The result will surely make Krystalnact look like child's play.
The sycophant quisling mediot's state-of-the-art "Sin of Omission" modus operandi will destroy this Republic, eventually; or, the Republic will destroy the bastards who'd practice [it].
There can be no in between.
...thanks for the ping, mr.m.
Well, there is no stopping them now. The Supreme Court's ruling has opened the doors to dangerous ramifications, one of the them is that schools will be free to teach children that sodomy is alright and normal, just like heterosexual couples, and homosexuals will be working to lower the age of consent and other perversions.
You know, since the Lawrence decision and their reaction to it, I wouldn't put anything past organized Gaydom or their elite supporters, including Sandra Day O'Connor.
The sycophant quisling mediot's state-of-the-art "Sin of Omission" modus operandi will destroy this Republic, eventually; or, the Republic will destroy the bastards who'd practice [it].
There can be no in between.
You're very welcome, Mr. L.
Considering that the USSC has ruled the Constitution invalid, the scenario you paint could arise in response to any number of groups -- illegal aliens, racist blacks, or gays. What O'Connor said, in so many words, is that reason and the rule of law are "intolerant," and we can have "no tolerance for the intolerant." When reason and the rule of law are no longer tolerated, violence and madness are the only ways left to settle disputes.
Yup.
"When reason and the rule of law are no longer tolerated, violence and madness are the only ways left to settle disputes."
That's right.
Of course you realize that today there'll be many who'll probably call the logic which delivered you to such a conclusion, "radical" & "reckless," right?
While in the (not so distant) future many more might just recognize it for what it really was: inevitable.
...kinda hope I'm no longer around should it come to pass.
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.