Posted on 01/29/2002 5:13:49 AM PST by simicyber
Traditional Values Coalition Opinion Editorial For publication on or after Facing The Truth About Homosexual Behavior By Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
Tuesday, January 29, 2002
Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition
Washington, DC – In 1987, a homosexual magazine called Guide published an article that laid out a detailed marketing plan for selling the normalization of homosexuality through the mass media. The article, "The Overhauling of Straight America,"* was eventually expanded into a full-length book called After the Ball: How America will conquer its fear & loathing of Gays in the 90’s.
Authors Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill, writing in the Guide article, note the following: "In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent—only later his unsightly derriere!" The objective has been to portray homosexuality as a fixed, unchangeable sexual identity—one that is determined at birth. This is untrue, but the propaganda campaign has largely succeeded.
The plan was—and still is—to present the controversy surrounding homosexuality as a civil rights issue—not about dangerous and unnatural homosexual behaviors. In addition, this marketing campaign includes an effort to portray homosexuals as victims of an intolerant society who need special legal protections. Kirk and Pill note: "In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector." Kirk and Pill also recommend smearing their enemies, comparing them to the KKK and Nazis. They write: "To be blunt, they must be vilified….we intend to make the antigays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types."
This marketing plan—designed to hide the facts about homosexual behavior, to portray homosexuals as victims, and to vilify their enemies—has been wildly successful. A compliant mainstream media has helped homosexuals accomplish many of these goals. One major newspaper syndicate, for example, has given homosexual activist Deb Price a weekly column to promote Kirk and Pill’s propaganda campaign.
Fortunately, there are still voices of sanity who are speaking out against the effort to portray homosexual behavior as normal and determined by birth. One such individual is Dr. A. Dean Byrd, vice president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). Dr. Byrd authored "The Innate-Immutable Argument Finds No Basis In Science." In it, he quotes a number of homosexual researchers and activists who admit that they can find no genetic basis for homosexual behavior.
One of those is Dean Hamer who tried to find a genetic cause for homosexuality by examining the DNA code at the end of the X chromosome. According to Hamer: "There is not a single master gene that makes people gay . . . . I don’t think we will be able to predict who will be gay."
The words of homosexual activist Camille Paglia are equally telling: "Homosexuality is not ‘normal.’ On the contrary, it is a challenge to the norm . . . Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction . . . No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous . . . homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait."
Dr. Byrd’s article is must reading for anyone who wants to understand the true nature and origin of homosexual behaviors. It deserves to be widely distributed to educators, legislators, and to editors and reporters. It is available at: www.narth.com/docs/innate.html.
*To read "The Overhauling of Straight America," go to: Traditional Values Coalition is an interdenominational public policy organization representing more than 43,000 churches across the United States. For more information, contact Sharone Carmona at 202-547-8570. TVC's Web site is:
You did not address my point that one of the problems of private schooling is the difficulty of finding competent teachers willing to work for peanuts. This problem will only be worsened by more private schooling and by the demographic and population changes underway.
Rather than attempting to deal with this you just blasted away at me without bothering to aim.
As I said my youngest son is in a private school so I am not opposed to private schooling but am aware that there are many problems which merely screeching "get the government out of education" does nothing to solve. Try again but be aware that "debate" requires speaking to the points raised by the other party in the debate.
No... it means that I find the fact that you are "considering" whether or not you wish to advocate the jailing of consenting adults for the private "crime" of homosexuality, to be contemptible.
Obviously I don't have the authority to establish such policy on my own. But I presume I am allowed an opinion, no?
You are allowed whatever opinion you wish, just as I am allowed to hold such a position in contempt.
Let me be even clearer. We do not show disdain because open homosexual displays (ie. prolonged kiss at the airport or on prime time TV show) are not equivalent to identical heterosexual displays. Why? Well read my post!!!!!
And so I ask again, how do you propose to "discourage" such behaviors?
Prison?
So, by reverting to sarcasm are you making the point that you can no longer argue your position?
No, I'm making my point through sarcasm.
People can have sexual relationships with each other outside the context of marriage and act responsibly. That's apparently a surprise to you since, using your statement as a guide, loving & committed adults - who are unmarried - should be discouraged from having sexual relationships as if the act of marriage magically changes everything.
I guess I was hoping that the reader would be able to recognize that I was talking about copulatory or specifically sexual acts (as opposed to a kiss at the airport) when I suggested that the poster should also show an equal disdain for public heterosexual acts.
I just don't see the attraction, especially when a wholesome alternative is but a "taint" away, but to each his own.
Surely you recognize that a free market economy (as opposed to the near socialist monopoly provided by the current system of public education factories) would eliminate such a problem by making education a competitive enterprise again... right?
(Oh, I keep forgetting you're a socialist... sorry)
Overall I'm pretty mellow. I don't have a problem with gay marriages as long as they don't try to force churches to recognize them. Churches make their own rules if people don't like their church's rules they should find another church. But all my rules apply equally across. I don't want to see any couples playing tonsil tango at the mall, it's not the place for it. The only butts I want to see hanging out are the ones I paid for in a stripclub. If your giving lollipops to kids they better be clean and normal, no "adult novelty" items for jr.
The only reason my "rules" effect homosexuals at all is that there's a bunch of them that trample all over these rules at every gay pride march. That's why I put out a call to the Log Cabin reps to start organizing and take these marches over. Wouldn't it be cool to turn on your TV find out their covering the latest gay pride march and see nothing but well dressed men and women behaving in a civilized fashion? Isn't it sad that wishing for that makes me a crazy dreamer?
Do you accept and agree that prolonged kissing in public under the loving circumstances that I described is in fact different. As such does it or does it not justify censorship of such displays (by homosexuals) in public?
I do not wish to think of you as evasive hence I hope you will declare where you stand on this issue.
What consenting adults do in private is up to them and their God so lets keep it there.
Often alcoholics need to reach a bottom. If they are not enabled they reach it sooner. However, that really can hurt them and some of the people they love. A recent approach is called "intervention" which is a very disciplined opportunity for the ones they love to let them know how much damage they're causing and hope they see the light before they hit bottom.
Hitting bottom includes such things as being fired, losing your friends, losing your family, etc.
Shalom.
Hey Blackie! I'd love to have a source/link for that one, can you help?
Hey Blackie! I'd love to have a source/link for that one, can you help?
Already answered. Since you already hold my position in contempt there's not much value in wasting my time with you.
Shalom.
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.