Exactly what is the gay 'agenda' and 'lifestyle'?

Amarillo Globe News ^ | July 15, 2003 | Greg Sagan

[gcruse]

I'm with David Horsley. If there is such a thing as a "gay agenda" I must be one of its supporters by default. I've never been "recruited" for this cause; never received any political material describing the agenda, the forces opposed to it, or how it will prevail in the law and the institutions of America; and I've never attended any meetings suggesting my heterosexual predilection is a target for gay subversion. But there are people out there with whom I disagree who tell me that gays of both genders are promoting this "agenda," and the demand that gays be given equal treatment under the law is apparently the first step on a path that will soon have me dating Bruce Willis.

I am not persuaded.

There's a lot of nonsense surrounding the phenomenon of homosexuality.

There's the idea that homosexuals "recruit" heterosexuals. This is absurd because you can't change someone else's sexual orientation. If you don't believe that, try changing your own. If you can't do it to yourself, what chance does anyone else have to do it to you? My sexual orientation is not up for grabs, and I defy anyone to sweet-talk me into sleeping with men.

There's the idea that gays corrupt the young. Some may, but as science repeatedly points out, most episodes of sexual abuse involving adults and children are perpetrated by heterosexuals. I suspect someday we will see a movement to outlaw heterosexuality because of all the perversions it spawns, but for now I would rather rest my weight on the idea that acts of sexual perversion are separate and distinct from sexual orientation. That way we can sweep up offenders of both persuasions.

And there's the idea that gays "choose" the "gay lifestyle" - whatever that is. As I've pointed out before on this page, if anyone can "choose" to be gay, so can you. And if you can choose to be gay, your right of choice should be protected as long as you meet the new criteria - consenting adults, privacy of the bedroom.

But the only element of "lifestyle" common to all gays is that they prefer sex with people of their own gender. Beyond that you can find gays who are committed and gays who sleep around, just like us. You can find gays who drink wine and gays who drink beer, just like us. You can find gays who are Republicans and gays who are Democrats, just like us.

The only "agenda" gays hold that I'm aware of is to correct mistreatment under the law, and since the gays doing this are American citizens who work, pay taxes and vote, there is no reason to deny them this much of what they want. Gays should be able to form lifelong committed relationships, participate as full partners in medical decisions of their mates, pass on property to survivors as easily as the rest of us can.

And, yes, they should be able to raise children as a family unit.

This is the idea that troubles some people to distraction - what about the children? Won't kids who grow up in a homosexual-parent family turn out gay? Well, do all children who grow up in heterosexual-parent families turn out straight? Of course not. I had three children by my first wife. Two are heterosexual, one is gay. So that argument doesn't hold water.

What is important to children in any family is the quality of the relationship between the parents and between parents and children. Two heterosexual parents can make the lives of their children a living hell. Two homosexual parents can make the lives of their children an example of trust, commitment, integrity, and love.

We all ought to seek and savor the second kind of relationship, not reject one of them out of hand because we don't like the pairing.

But giving gays some minimal protection under the law is an essential first step to understanding their relationships, because nothing distorts research like criminalizing the behavior to be studied.

Besides, when gays are denied fundamental protection under the law, we are stating to the whole world that justice in America depends on your choice of sleeping partners. This is an insupportable premise for public policy.

For those who are rabidly opposed to homosexuality, I say by all means stay heterosexual. Just don't expect to see your zeal elevated to legal prohibition. Gays can be good Americans, too, and discriminating against good Americans with the law has yet to prove itself a viable long-term strategy.

[Trace21230]

You, on the other hand, are completely tolerant of those who believe that homosexuality is sin, right?

Actually, I respect any religious person's view that homosexuality is immoral and against their religious beliefs. One of the rights we have as Americans is the freedom to believe what we choose, including the belief that homosexuality is a sin.

I do not agree with using the government to foist a particular religious view (i.e. that homosexuality is wrong) upon everyone else in society. Usually, most religious folks want to do exactly that. So, we have a problem. It has nothing to do with me disrespecting their beliefs--I respect everyone's right to have whatever religious beliefs they wish. Rather, the problem lies in the presumption that their religious belief is superior and should be imposed on everyone else.

That's not my idea of a free republic, perhaps it is yours.

Trace

[MHGinTN]

Homosexuals Demanding Marriage Rights?

The trick question circulating from homosexual apologists is, 'How will allowing homosexuals to marry harm heterosexual marriage(s)?' To address this twisted query one must understand what marriage is, as an institution within society and thus a crucial institution for civilization. This writer is convinced that homosexuality is deviant behavior ... little more than twenty years ago, it was defined as aberrant behavior in clinical Psychology texts.

To open a vital institution to even more degeneracy than is already corroding the institution because of tacit acceptance for adultery, spousal and child abuse, and rampant divorce with 'no fault' is to deliver a final death blow to the institution most tasked with the safety and nurturing of our children ... and the maturation of our young adults. When one looks at the ancillary factors of the institution of marriage --as when divorce, custody, and child support monies are contemplated by courts/judges-- it is evident that opening the institution to membership of more deviancy does nothing to improve the institution and in deed does much to degrade the sanctity of the institution. To understand why, one needs to look at what homosexuality represents ... and I don't mean to focus upon the deviant acts.

While there is a hormonal influence traceable in a very rare percentage of homosexual behavior, the behavior is a complex mix of onset hormonal fires and choice in behavior patterns. But how to explain the homosexuals who actually turn their lives around and away from the debasement of homosexual behaviors? You can tell a homo-activist by their insistence that this is not a genuine turnaround.

As human beings are exposed to notions of God and salvation, there is a very real tug of war between the 'adamic nature' we're all born with and the longing to commune with God, to be pleasing to Him not abhorrent to Him. I think this desire to relate to/with God the Creator is generated because of the human spirit within our human soul. All life has a soul of life, but as far as we know only the human animal has a spirit, and that unique 'thing' was designed to need God's spark within it to truly be alive in spirit as opposed to dead in spirit.

As the homosexual community seeks society's full affirmation for their deviant behavior, they cannot resolve the inner whispers in their human spirit ... they cannot mollify that which Holy God calls them to, simply by forcing through their activism the acceptance and protection within this society or any society. If one believes God speaks to us through scripture, it is clear that God abhorrs, detests, loathes homosexual behavior.

Much of the activism of homosexuals is misdirected rage against God's still small voice calling them to reject the behavioral urges, in favor of spiritual growth. Deviancy in sexual matters (whether adultery, or homosexual behavior, or addiction to pornography ...) is an immaturity in sexual development, where sexual and social development run into the 'diety' needs of the maturing human being with a spirit that will not be at peace until a relationship with the Creator is begun. It is the source of so many homosexuals that rage against Christianity. It is the source of their demand to have marriage rights. It is also the source of the demand to be accepted within a church community, as if they are 'just like everyone else'. They are not like everyone else, unless everyone else is slave to outright defiance over what God has called abomination!

A recent net exchange on the topic included the following cogent thought from a reasonable poster: "He [God] wanted us to love him freely. Homosexual life is no life at all." As the poster explained later, in so many words, when our behavior impedes our free association with Him [God], we are in a state of unrequited spiritual love, deep spiritual longing if you will, thus such a state in bodily life is not 'aliveness', spiritually. I'm reminded of where Jesus said 'Let the dead bury the dead'.

And lastly, 'Many are called but few are chosen' and 'Faithful is He that calleth you, for He will also do it'. Of the so many called (beckoned to, like the 'rich young ruler') to become the children of God, why are so few chosen? Because so few will let Him do the saving.

It is innate in so many to want to respond to God's still small voice by doing their own saving, being good enough to 'warrant' God's affirmation of them, not relenting to allow Him to grace them with eternal life in Him. As Cain railed at God when told to bring a specific offering, 'I can bring what I have produced by my own efforts and it will be good enough.' But it never was.

Achieving the 'right to marry, protected by the state' will not bring the Grace of God upon the unions of these deviants seeking affirmation ... or any deviants or their deviant behaviors for that matter. Adulterers will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Why should homosexuals assume they will, merely because they might have state protection while corroding even further that which God instituted? God instituted marriage for the purpose of man cleaving unto his wife and thus away from the worldly. God calls homosexuality an abomination. An institution under assault from so many corrosive forces already will not endure the further injection of deviancy into the structure.

From a secular perspective, the approval by the state for degenerates to take full advantage of institutions already corroded by over-liberalization may affirm the degenerates, but it nullifies the ability of the institution to function as a foundational good for the society and its children by overtly exposing both the young and the maturing individuals to degeneracy as an acceptable behavior pattern.
##########

[ExSES]

I don't care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes; I have two simple points about this: 1)don't stick it in my face, and 2) don't ask me to pay for the consequences. This doesn't mean I condone any sort of perversion. I find it rather juvenile to politicize one's sexuality.

Agreed!

My Uncle (who is dearly missed) was "of that bent". He was "way out there on the fringe"..., yet, "on a personal basis" regularly "guided" my siblings and I to be wary and alert to "deviant behavior"!

It has been nearly 35 years since he passed away and, he is missed!

To this day..., I "emote" for those who have been burdened by this this "lot in life"... yet THANK HIM for his guidance in pursuing my own path!!!

[smith288]

You, on the other hand, are completely tolerant of those who believe that homosexuality is sin, right?

I dont get it... Am I allowed to put up a fight against skinheads? Black Panthers? Islamunism? Why cant I put up a fight against militant homosexuals? Why does this make me a hater even though I dont give a rats butt how they run their lives, its their onslaught on traditional values and minimizing people of faith for disagreeing in their historically unaccepted behavior. Why am I not allowed to defend my right to maintain traditional values that made this country great?

[gcruse]

I don't even want to listen! ;-)

I knew that.  With your screen name,
it's obvious you're into getting others to.
You've been a bad boy.

[longtermmemmory]

so all the non-religion based reasons that homosexuality is bad, unnatural, and unacceptable are sufficient to preclude the establishment of the cult of homosexuality.

[GovernmentShrinker]

There are NO studies supporting the figure "41 avg lifespan without AIDS" that you quoted, unless by some amateur activist outfit with no credibility whatsoever. I note that you can't provide a single source. You are just parroting some nonsense you read somewhere.

[gcruse]

. I do not buy into it and firmly believe a fag is one because
 he/she wants to be and with that choice comes the problems.

Please see Emmylou's excellent refutation of this at post #68.

[Dataman]

So you're saying you can be talked out of your sexual orientation?

You can be molested out of it.

[gcruse]

The original contention was that one could be talked
out of a sexual orientation. Beyond that, discussion
has not gone.

[Dataman]

Are not children taught morality?

Answer: yes.

Can they not be taught immorality?

Answer: yes.

Do teachers persuade?

Answer: yes.

Therefore children can --and ARE-- be persuaded to behave.

[diamond6]

Not for kids to read:


MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO
By Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-3113.

---

Throughout history, the major civilizations major religions condemned homosexuality.1 Until 1961 homosexual acts were illegal throughout America.

Gays claim that the "prevailing attitude toward homosexuals in the U.S. and many other countries is revulsion and hostility....for acts and desires not harmful to anyone."3 The American Psychological Association and the American Public Health Association assured the U.S. Supreme Court in 1986 that "no significant data show that engaging in...oral and anal sex, results in mental or physical dysfunction."4

What Homosexuals Do
The major surveys on homosexual behavior are summarized below. Two things stand out 1) homosexuals behave similarly world-over, and 2) as Harvard Medical Professor, Dr. William Haseltine,33 noted in 1993, the "changes in sexual behavior that have been reported to have occurred in some groups have proved, for the most part, to be transient. For example, bath houses and sex clubs in many cities have either reopened or were never closed."

Homosexual Activities (in %)
US16 US13 US US18 Denmark20 US19 London27 Sydney/London26 Canada25
1940s1977 83/84 1983 1984 1983 1985 1991
ever ever ever in yr in yr in mo in mo last 6mo
oral/penile 83 99 100/99 99 86 67
anal/penile 68 91 93/98 95 92 95 100
oral/anal 59 83 92/92 63 69 89 55/65
urine sex 10 23 29/
fisting/toys 22 41/47 34
fecal sex-eating 4 8
enemas 11 11
torture sex 22 37 37
public/orgy sex 61 76 88
sex with minors 37 23 24/
ORAL SEX Homosexuals fellate almost all of their sexual contacts (and ingest semen from about half of these). Semen contains many of the germs carried in the blood. Because of this, gays who practice oral sex verge on consuming raw human blood, with all its medical risks. Since the penis often has tiny lesions (and often will have been in unsanitary places such as a rectum), individuals so involved may become infected with hepatitis A or gonorrhea (and even HIV and hepatitis B). Since many contacts occur between strangers (70% of gays estimated that they had had sex only once with over half of their partners17,27), and gays average somewhere between 106 and 1105 different partners/year, the potential for infection is considerable.

RECTAL SEX Surveys indicate that about 90% of gays have engaged in rectal intercourse, and about two-thirds do it regularly. In a 6-month long study of daily sexual diaries,3 gays averaged 110 sex partners and 68 rectal encounters a year.

Rectal sex is dangerous. During rectal intercourse the rectum becomes a mixing bowl for 1) saliva and its germs and/or an artificial lubricant, 2) the recipient's own feces, 3) whatever germs, infections or substances the penis has on it, and 4) the seminal fluid of the inserter. Since sperm readily penetrate the rectal wall (which is only one cell thick) causing immunologic damage, and tearing or bruising of the anal wall is very common during anal/penile sex, these substances gain almost direct access to the blood stream. Unlike heterosexual intercourse (in which sperm cannot penetrate the multilayered vagina and no feces are present),7 rectal intercourse is probably the most sexually efficient way to spread hepatitis B, HIV syphilis and a host of other blood-borne diseases.

Tearing or ripping of the anal wall is especially likely with "fisting," where the hand and arm is inserted into the rectum. It is also common when "toys" are employed (homosexual lingo for objects which are inserted into the rectum--bottles, carrots, even gerbils8). The risk of contamination and/or having to wear a colostomy bag from such "sport" is very real. Fisting was apparently so rare in Kinsey's time that he didn't think to talk about it. By 1977, well over a third of gays admitted to doing it. The rectum was not designed to accommodate the fist, and those who do so can find themselves consigned to diapers for life.

FECAL SEX About 80% of gays (see Table) admit to licking and/or inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it are probably at even greater risk. In the diary study,5 70% of the gays had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result? --the "annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent, whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." In 1992,26 it was noted that the proportion of London gays engaging in oral/anal sex had not declined since 1984.

While the body has defenses against fecal germs, exposure to the fecal discharge of dozens of strangers each year is extremely unhealthy. Ingestion of human waste is the major route of contracting hepatitis A and the enteric parasites collectively known as the Gay Bowel Syndrome. Consumption of feces has also been implicated in the transmission of typhoid fever,9 herpes, and cancer.27 About 10% of gays have eaten or played with [e.g., enemas, wallowing in feces]. The San Francisco Department of Public Health saw 75,000 patients per year, of whom 70 to 80 per cent are homosexual men....An average of 10 per cent of all patients and asymptomatic contacts reported...because of positive fecal samples or cultures for amoeba, giardia, and shigella infections were employed as food handlers in public establishments; almost 5 per cent of those with hepatitis A were similarly employed."10 In 1976, a rare airborne scarlet fever broke out among gays and just missed sweeping through San Francisco.10 The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that 29% of the hepatitis A cases in Denver, 66% in New York, 50% in San Francisco, 56% in Toronto, 42% in Montreal and 26% in Melbourne in the first six months of 1991 were among gays.11 A 1982 study "suggested that some transmission from the homosexual group to the general population may have occurred."12

URINE SEX About 10% of Kinsey's gays reported having engaged in "golden showers" [drinking or being splashed with urine]. In the largest survey of gays ever conducted,13 23% admitted to urine-sex. In the largest random survey of gays,6 29% reported urine-sex. In a San Francisco study of 655 gays,14 only 24% claimed to have been monogamous in the past year. Of these monogamous gays, 5% drank urine, 7% practiced "fisting," 33% ingested feces via anal/oral contact, 53% swallowed semen, and 59% received semen in their rectum during the previous month.

OTHER GAY SEX PRACTICES
SADOMASOCHISM as the Table indicates, a large minority of gays engage in torture for sexual fun. Sex with minors 25% of white gays17 admitted to sex with boys 16 or younger as adults. In a 9-state study,30 33% of the 181 male, and 22% of the 18 female teachers caught molesting students did so homosexually (though less than 3% of men and 2% of women engage in homosexuality31). Depending on the study, the percent of gays reporting sex in public restrooms ranged from 14%16 to 41%13 to 66%,6 9%16, 60%13 and 67%5 reported sex in gay baths; 64%16 and 90%18 said that they used illegal drugs.

Fear of AIDS may have reduced the volume of gay sex partners, but the numbers are prodigious by any standard. Morin15 reported that 824 gays had lowered their sex-rate from 70 different partners/yr. in 1982 to 50/yr. by 1984. McKusick14 reported declines from 76/yr. to 47/yr. in 1985. In Spain32 the average was 42/yr. in 1989.

Medical Consequences of Homosexual Sex
Death and disease accompany promiscuous and unsanitary sexual activity. 70%25 to 78%x,13 of gays reported having had a sexually transmitted disease. The proportion with intestinal parasites (worms, flukes, amoeba) ranged from 25%18 to 39%19 to 59%.20 As of 1992, 83% of U.S. AIDS in whites had occurred in gays.21 The Seattle sexual diary study3? reported that gays had, on a yearly average:

fellated 108 men and swallowed semen from 48;
exchanged saliva with 96;
experienced 68 penile penetrations of the anus; and
ingested fecal material from 19.
No wonder 10% came down with hepatitis B and 7% contracted hepatitis A during the 6-month study.

Effects on the Lifespan
Smokers and drug addicts don't live as long as non-smokers or non-addicts, so we consider smoking and narcotics abuse harmful. The typical life-span of homosexuals suggests that their activities are more destructive than smoking nd as dangerous as drugs.

Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.23 The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to U.S. averages for longevity; the medium age of death of married men was 75, and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older). For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57, and 32% of them died old. Married women averaged age 79 at death; 85% died old. Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of them died old.

The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39. For the 829 gays who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42, and 9% died old. The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44, and 20% died old.

Two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%) of gays died violently. They were 116 times more apt to be murdered; 24 times more apt to commit suicide; and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of comparably-aged white males. Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure were exceptionally common. Twenty percent of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident--a rate 487 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44. The age distribution of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1989 to 1992 suggests a similarly shortened life-span.

The Gay Legacy
Homosexuals rode into the dawn of sexual freedom and returned with a plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them. Those who treat AIDS patients are at great risk, not only from HIV infection, which as of 1992 involved over 100 health care workers,21 but also from TB and new strains of other diseases.24 Those who are housed with AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Those who are housed with AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Dr. Max Essex, chair of the Harvard AIDS Institute, warned congress in 1992 that "AIDS has already led to other kinds of dangerous epidemics...If AIDS is not eliminated, other new lethal microbes will emerge, and neither safe sex nor drug free practices will prevent them."28 At least 8, and perhaps as many as 30 29 patients had been infected with HIV by health care workers as of 1992.

The Biological Swapmeet
The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror story --imagine exchanging saliva, feces, semen and/or blood with dozens of different men each year. Imagine drinking urine, ingesting feces and experiencing rectal trauma on a regular basis. Often these encounters occur while the participants are drunk, high, and/or in an orgy setting. Further, many of them occur in extremely unsanitary places (bathrooms, dirty peep shows), or, because homosexuals travel so frequently, in other parts of the world.

Every year, a quarter or more of homosexuals visit another country.20 Fresh American germs get taken to Europe, Africa and Asia. And fresh pathogens from these continents come here. Foreign homosexuals regularly visit the U.S. and participate in this biological swapmeet.

The Pattern of Infection
Unfortunately the danger of these exchanges does not merely affect homosexuals. Travelers carried so many tropical diseases to New York City that it had to institute a tropical disease center, and gays carried HIV from New York City to the rest of the world.27 Most of the 6,349 Americans who got AIDS from contaminated blood as of 1992, received it from homosexuals and most of the women in California who got AIDS through heterosexual activity got it from men who engaged in homosexual behavior.23 The rare form of airborne scarlet fever that stalked San Francisco in 1976 also started among homosexuals.10

Genuine Compassion
Society is legitimately concerned with health risks-- they impact our taxes and everyone's chances of illness and injury. Because we care about them, smokers are discouraged from smoking by higher insurance premiums, taxes on cigarettes and bans against smoking in public. These social pressures cause many to quit. They likewise encourage non-smokers to stay non-smokers.

Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle.

[Trace21230]

so all the non-religion based reasons that homosexuality is bad, unnatural, and unacceptable are sufficient to preclude the establishment of the cult of homosexuality.

The "non-religion based reasons," which you decline to state, could probably be equally applied to heterosexual conduct.

You may want Uncle Sam peeping in your bedroom to make sure that you don't do anything too disruptive to the society's pristine social fabric, but I think my privacy is worth more than that.

I'll pass on the bedroom police, thanks anyway.

Let's agree on this, you stay out of my bedroom and I'll stay out of your church. The government can stay out of both. I think that's a fair enough solution.

Trace

[longtermmemmory]

excellent? you must be a homosexual.

She just regurgitates the same homosexual propaganda that is used to justify recruiting children into the homosexual lifestyle.

She has just protrayed herself as a "f*ghag" who hangs out with happy homosexuals.

Check out the link to audio tapes of the homosexual recruiters in action in the schools.

If it really was genetic, homosexuals would not be engaged in "try something bad" lectures or "kids, don't knock homosexuality until you tried it" lectures.

It is a choice. There are NO genes, the only gene Xq26 was disproven. The brain studies were show fixed and false once more than 14 brains were studied. Twin studies were discredited.

The only thing the homosexuals have is the backed up BS they keep spewing. Such new theories such as kinship theory, hormonal invitro imbalanc, and anything to blame someone else other than themselves for their sexual gratification from their fetish.

[Trace21230]

So you're saying you can be talked out of your sexual orientation?

You can be molested out of it.

Yes, and homosexuals hardly have a monopoly on molestation. If there's any group that has a monopoly on it....well, I'm not going to go there.

Trace

[longtermmemmory]

I have never been one to cite religion with any specificity in this issue.

Consider that homosexuals are more likely to molest children.

Consider that homosexuals are seeking to special rights and special protections in society and in schools.

Consider that children raised by homsexuals are certain to have sexual problems as adults.

Consider that homosexuals are more prone to sexually transmitted diseases as a lifestyle

Consider that homosexuals are a behavior that many psychologists are considering a fetish. Not unlike BDSM or shoes or rubber or leather or any other method used to gain sexual arousal.

Consider that groups like GLSEN seek to replace parental moral authority with their own "sexual gratification" authority.

consider that children who are homosexually abused are more prone to end up focusing on a homosexual lifestlye unless they are recipients of counseling to prevent the resultant deviance.

Consider that society has a vested interest in ensuring that the marriage institution consiste of ONE mother/wife and ONE father/husband. Dan Quayle was right even more than he knew.

[MHGinTN]

Thank you, Diamond, for that troubling update. I'm copying it to post on other threads over the next few weeks, as the homsexual activists and apologists infest FR with their agenda-driven posting.

[Trace21230]

Consider that your stereotypes are meaningless and that this nation is built on individual rights, not cliched generalizations.

I suppose since over 50% of marriages end in divorce, we should prevent all married heterosexual couples from having children. After all, we can't subject society to the possibility that a child grows up in a broken home, now can we?

Trace

[gcruse]

Therefore children can --and ARE-- be persuaded to behave.

Isn't that special?