Posted on 07/01/2002 11:45:12 PM PDT by scripter
"I did not choose to be homosexual. I would change my sexual orientation if that were within my power."
So wrote Robert Bauman, the powerful, ultraconservative congressman from Maryland. Americans were stunned in 1980 when headlines revealed Bauman had been caught having a sexual rendezvous with a young male prostitute. In his book, "The Gentleman From Maryland: The Conscience of a Gay Conservative," Bauman revealed the conditions that shaped his own tortured double life as a congressman and closet homosexual.
At the tender age of 5, Bauman had been sexually seduced by a neighbor boy about 12. Reflecting on that pivotal experience, as well as subsequent similar episodes, Bauman describes the powerful feelings he found welling up within him at a young age:
This was not a matter of chance attraction to a forbidden object. This was a frightening force from deep within my being, an involuntary reaction to the sight, smell, and feel of other boys. I neither understood nor accepted it.
And I came to hate myself because of the presence within me of this horrible weakness, this uncleanness of spirit over which I seemed to have no control. So added to the loneliness was a growing but barely perceived self-loathing. Hadn't I always known that something was wrong with me?
Wasn't that why God took my mom away from me? Didn't they send me away to school because I was bad? And now this strange internal desire was further confirmation of just how unworthy a person I was.
Nearly four decades later it seems easy to dramatize the thoughts of an introspective 8-year-old boy. At the time it was overpowering, but not nearly so dramatic. Drama requires an audience and I was determined that no one would ever know about the turmoil going on inside. I was sure my predicament was a unique punishment designed only for me.
Unable to understand it myself, I could never even attempt an explanation to someone else. I countered my dilemma with a plan that constituted the essence of simplicity. I made up my mind that I was not "queer." I heard all those denunciations of homos by my military school peers and firmly resolved I could never be considered one of such a despicable breed.
To buttress my intellectual conviction of purity, I was required to construct a whole series of mental fortifications to protect and conceal the real me, not just from the external world, but from myself as well. In time, the turreted, crenellated walls grew into a self-impressive battlement like the infamous Maginot Line … And like that ill-conceived strategy, when the time came, my own defenses crumbled, not just in one ultimate test, but repeatedly.
Bauman was elected in 1973 as representative of the first congressional district of Maryland. He led a double life as a married man with four children, while at the same time engaging in anonymous homosexual one-night stands. He describes the wrenching emotional aftermath he experienced after each such episode:
Each time I would feel great guilt and head for Saturday confession at St. Peter's or St. Joseph's on Capitol Hill so I could make amends with God and be in the state of grace for Sunday Communion. I would always vow to myself and God I would never do it again.
I blotted out my doubts, my actions, submerging myself in the excitement of politics where compliments, victories and deference helped reassure me I was a good person. Rather than accept myself as I was, I fought for symbols and abstractions promising greater glory and meaning to my life. If I could save the world, I might avoid having to save myself.
My own selfish goal was to conceal the truth. Looking back, it is difficult to believe the degree of insanity marking my own self-deception and that I tried to impose on my wife.
How could any normal and moral human being do what I did? How could anyone, however callous, repeatedly be unfaithful to one's spouse (lying, evading responsibility, breaking solemn vows)? I have described how it could be done. Why I did it is the serious question. And I have no answer, even to this day. I do not know.
In many ways, I was driven by a force over which I seemed to have little control. Of course, my choice was conscious and deliberate. It could have been altered. But some compulsion drove me, blotting out all I had learned, diminishing in importance all that was most dear and important. I seemed willing to risk my marriage, my wife and children, even life itself.
And yet I felt compelled to act as I did. Some inner force drove me, and repeatedly pursuing this insane conduct made it more difficult to resist each time I was tempted again.
Most amazing was my failure to consider asking for help. Each time I would feel shame, remorse and guilt. That tough trio of emotions gnawed at me constantly, I prayed for deliverance, went to confession, always at a church where the priest would not know me.
Sometimes I would go for weeks, even months, without incident, and then something would set me off: a period of depression, an event that brought elation. Setback or triumph, there was no set pattern of causation each time, but repetition seemed inevitable. I could not accept my own sexuality and I acted in public consistent with my religious and moral beliefs, even if my private life was totally inconsistent.
In 1980, at the age of 43, Bauman saw his political career come crashing down upon him following the exposure of his solicitation of a teen-age male hustler. He subsequently lost his re-election bid, as well as his family, his historic home and many of his powerful friends.
Doing unto others
OK, rewind tape to age 5.
Bauman, poignantly recounting his tortured life, confesses that he was seduced by an older boy at that tender and exquisitely vulnerable age.
Did that experience plant in Bauman the seed of his future homosexuality?
It would seem so, despite today's wishful but unsubstantiated claims of a "gay gene." According to the peer-reviewed 1998 study, "Sexual Abuse of Boys," by William C. Holmes, M.D., and Gail B. Slap, M.D., sexually abused young males "were up to seven times more likely to self-identify as gay or bisexual than peers who had not been abused."
What about the 12-year-old? Why does he sexually seduce a 5-year-old boy?
No doubt he's just doing to a new kid what was done to him.
Since children are so impressionable, sexual seduction or assault is a major trauma that can, and often does, literally re-program the victim's identity – his view of who and what he is. While the study cited above seems to confirm this, the point is self-evident: prisons are full of child-molesters who were molested as children and batterers who were battered as children.
The 12-year-old very likely felt compelled to convert the innocent, the uninitiated.
An innocent young child has a "bright-light" quality that feels strangely threatening to those in the grip of corruption. This explains a great deal of child abuse.
To the person who's been "re-programmed," it's deeply satisfying – far beyond mere sexual pleasure – to "initiate" an innocent person. Doing so serves to anesthetize his conscience and assuage his inner conflict by destroying the innocence of another person.
Stunning advances
There was a time when Americans knew that homosexuals were not "born that way," but rather, had their normal gender-identity development disturbed and re-directed through early childhood experiences. Not just psychiatrists and psychologists, but average people once recognized on some level that flawed relationships with mothers and fathers could cause girls and boys to grow up with gender confusion.
But that was a time before much of America itself was seduced into believing there is no God, or if there is a God that He is inconsequential to the affairs of men. It was a time when biblical morality inspired the culture and laws of the land.
In the America of another generation, homosexuality was a crime in the eyes of the law and a mortal sin in the eyes of religion. Medicine came to homosexuality's rescue by declaring it, like alcoholism, no longer a crime but, rather, a disease – a pathological behavior.
Decades later, under intense pressure from homosexuals within and without the psychiatric establishment, medicine again saved homosexuality – but this time by declaring it not to be a disease, not abnormal, pathological behavior.
The rapid and stunning ascendancy of homosexuality in the Western World in recent years is, beyond all else, a spiritual barometer of enormous significance. The brilliant public relations campaign homosexual activists have waged over the last several decades is matched in effectiveness only by that of the pro-abortion vanguard a generation ago.
The early titans of the abortion-rights movement determined that the way to win the hearts and minds of Americans was literally to reframe the debate away from the real issue of destroying the unborn, and instead to focus on nonsensical but powerfully compelling emotional catch-phrases like "a woman's right over her body" and "freedom of choice." In the same way, homosexual public relations and marketing professionals, like "After the Ball" authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, charted a sophisticated, long-term marketing campaign – eschewing any references to what homosexuals actually do – that would gradually win over the hearts and minds of Americans. They have succeeded, no doubt beyond their wildest expectations.
Today, in every area of life – culture, entertainment, law, the news media, education, even the church – homosexual strides have been nothing less than staggering. In what was once a Judeo-Christian culture, Christians and other proponents of traditional biblical principles are routinely cast as bigots and "homophobes." Meanwhile, homosexuals, once condemned as both corrupted and corrupting, are today honored, idealized, defended as victims and celebrated as heroes and role models.
"Pedophile priests"
But then came the scandal in the Catholic Church.
Even gay journalists' pervasive influence in the mainstream press has not prevented the harsh truth from seeping out – that more than 90 percent of reported offenses of "pedophile priests" don't involve pedophilia at all (adult sexual contact with a pre-pubescent child), but rather, predatory homosexual men preying on young, adolescent boys.
In other words, the public has become aware for the first time that there is a huge problem in the Catholic Church with homosexual men preying on straight teens. This revelation has threatened to set back the gay-rights movement decades, homosexual activist leaders bemoan.
And yet, the Catholic Church situation is just the tip of the iceberg.
For the radioactive truth – threatening to contaminate the carefully cultivated public image of gay normalcy – is that the homosexual activist subculture is profoundly and obsessively fixated on youth. Despite all the dismissive denials of articulate gay spokespeople, the obsession with young males today – as it has always been since ancient times – is central to the homosexual lifestyle.
This does not mean, by any means, that all homosexuals dream of corrupting youth. Such is clearly not the case.
But the homosexual activist movement – the group that is causing homosexual propaganda to be taught in American public schools beginning in kindergarten, and that is setting up school "safe zones" to re-direct children to gay "counselors" – is, indeed, focused on America's youth.
This is nothing new. Before the birth of the Judeo-Christian civilization that produced the greatest abundance of freedom, progress and enlightenment in history, perversion, homosexuality and – yes – child molestation were widespread.
It's all about sex
When all is said and done, homosexuals who go after young, straight boys – whether they are priests or Boy Scout leaders or baseball coaches or whoever – know, consciously or subconsciously, that they may well be putting their young "partner" on the road to homosexuality. They are planting a seed in that fertile ground that has a good chance of taking root and producing more of their kind.
The other reason they are attracted to young, straight people – and this they share with heterosexual child molesters – is that there is a satisfaction for deeply corrupted people in corrupting others. In a bizarre way, it feels like completion, vindication, triumph, victory. It reaffirms the rightness of what they have become, and removes the painful contrast of innocence.
When all is said and done, the destruction of innocence is what homosexual lust for boys is all about.
"Let´s look at gay behavior as defined by two gays, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen Ph.D., authors of After the Ball: How America will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90´s (1989).
In Chapter Six, they outline “ten categories of misbehavior,” drawn from their own experiences, wide reading and thousands of hours of conversation with hundreds of other gays...
What follows are some highlights. As you read this, ask yourself if there is another human community, including the Mafia that could make these generalizations about itself. Ask yourself if we haven´t caught this disease, or at least the sniffles.
• The authors say “a surprisingly high percentage” of pathological liars and con men are gay. This results from a natural habit of self-concealment, and leads to a stubborn self-deception about one´s own gayness and its implications.
• They say gays suffer from a “narcissistic” personality disorder and they give this clinical description: “pathological self absorption, a need for constant attention and admiration, lack of empathy or concern for others, quickly bored, shallow, interested in fads, seductive, overemphasis on appearance, superficially charming, promiscuous, exploitative, preoccupied with remaining youthful, relationships alternate between over idealization and devaluation.”
• As an example of this narcissism, the authors say “a very sizable proportion of gay men” who have been diagnosed HIV positive continue to have unprotected sex.
• They say the majority of gays are extremely promiscuous and self-indulgent. They must continuously up the ante to achieve arousal. This begins with alcohol and drugs and includes such “forbidden” aspects of sex as wallowing in filth (fetishism and coprophilia) and sadomasochism, which involves violence.
• They say many gays indulge in sex in public bathrooms and think it is antigay harassment when it is stopped. Many think they have a right to importune straight males, including children.
• Many gays are “single minded sexual predators” fixated on youth and physical beauty alone. When it comes to the old or ugly, gays are “the real queerbashers.” Disillusioned themselves, they are cynical about love.
• “Relationships between gay men don´t usually last very long.” They quickly tire of their partners and fall victim to temptation. The “cheating ratio of ‘married´ gay males, given enough time, approaches 100%.”..."
Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse
Violence against the soul: Alan Keyes shows homosexuals assaulting kids' moral consciences
Seven Steps to Recruit-Proof Your Child
Assemblyman MOUNTJOY opposes promotion of homosexuality in public schools.
Thanks! We've got an E-mail circle going now for the "internet challanged" during the day. We've been forwarding this material right along...
If I don't catch y'all before then, HAVE A GREAT, SAFE and EXCELLENT 4TH!!!
Homosexual advocates often state that not all homosexual men molest boys. That is absolutely true. As anecdotal evidence, the homosexual men I have known have not done so, as far as I know.
By way of analogy, not all alcoholics drive drunk. So we have two sets of destructive behavior. We also have two groups with abnormal conditions, neither of which is guaranteed to engage in the behavior.
Now, alcoholics comprise only a small percentage of the population, and homosexual men comprise only a tiny percentage of the population. Yet, the percentage of drunk drivers who are alcoholics is way out of proportion with their percentage of the total population. Likewise, the percentage of child molesters who are homosexual is way out of proportion with the percentage of homosexuals in the total population.
Therefore, statistically, it is fair to reason that, just as an alcoholic is far more likely to drive drunk than a non-alcoholic, a homosexual man is far more likely to molest a child than a normal man, even though not all alcoholics drive drunk, and not all homosexual men molest children.
As a parent, I would neither allow my children to be chauffeured by an alcoholic, nor would I entrust a boy to the care of a homosexual man. I don't hate either person, I just base my thinking upon reality, as opposed to political correctness.
I hope that clears things up for you.
As for the "alcoholic gene", there is a difference between tendency, and action. One is out of one's control; the other is a choice. This difference applies to other areas of life also. (hint, hint)
God Save America (Please)<be
You to seem wicket! I am old enough to be your grandmother who would shudder to have a grandson like you!
First, much like the report of the FRC to which it was responding, this is not a disinterested party conducting objective research. It is an advocacy group with a stated agenda opposing one of the two possible conclusions of such a study. As such, their testimony on the topic is inherently biased.
Second, putting aside from the question of FRC's misuse of a source for their report which seems to be their central objection, the HRC's own argument relies on "policy statements" of expert groups, inaccurately equating these statements with scientific conclusions. As we all know, policy statements are driven by many factors other than science - politics being the most prominent. A policy statement on this question provides exactly nothing of substance toward the truth.
As to the letter from the researcher objecting to the use of his study by the FRC, it contains this curious statement:
Your statement that "the evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners" appears to come from the assumption that if an adult male is attracted to a male child, this adult male's sexual orientation is ipso facto homosexual.This would seem to indicate that, in reaching the conclusion that homosexuals are not more likely than heterosexuals in molesting adolescents or children, the researcher adopted a curious, and non-standard definition of homosexuality. In common usage same-sex sexual attraction equates to homosexual orientation. Yet this researcher apparently adopted a different definition for purposes of this study, making his conclusions about homosexuality so vague as to be meaningless without better understanding. For all we know, FRC's use of this study was perfectly accurate because they used the more common definition of homosexual orientation. But due to this semantic issue, the researcher objects. That is of course speculation, but no more so than the opposite conclusion.
In any case, as I said it is an interesting source, even if flawed. It raises plenty of questions which a comprehensive study of this issue ought to be able to answer.
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.