Research Group Warns Schools of Homosexual Propaganda

CNSNews.com) - Schools should let their students know that the differences between the homosexual and heterosexual cultures are many and profound, contrary to assertions by homosexual advocacy groups who seek to portray homosexuality as something innate and essentially without risk, a leading psychological group said.

Indeed, a same-sex male couple rarely stays together if the partners are not open to permitting each other to have outside sexual contacts, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) said in a recent mailing to 15,300 public school superintendents around the United States.

The mailing "seeks to correct the misinformation that is being promoted by these homosexual advocacy groups that have an incredible influence on the public education system," said Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, president of NARTH and a proponent of reparative therapy for homosexuals who want to change.

"What we're trying to say to school supervisors is, 'don't just rely on pro-gay information sources to make your decisions.' All our stuff is well grounded scientifically," he said. NARTH is a non-religious scientific organization whose 1,000 members include psychologists, psychiatrists and therapists.

Homosexual advocacy groups, however, denounced the mailing as a misinformation campaign that will destroy families and hurt children.

"It hurts families," said Wayne Besen, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign. "It keeps families separated, it confuses people who need to accept themselves, and it promotes misinformation and outdated theories that are against what every leading medical and mental health organization in the nation says."

The mailing goes out to the same school officials who were targeted in 1999 with a pamphlet entitled "Just the Facts," written by a coalition that included the American Psychological Association (APA).

The APA pamphlet encouraged schools not to inform students that therapy exists to diminish homosexuality and not to refer such students to counselors who will reflect their own family's deeply held values.

"NARTH was so incensed by the misinformation and untruths provided in the APA pamphlet that it immediately took on the task of raising the necessary funds required to compile, print and distribute" the mailing, Nicolosi said.

"Homosexual advocacy groups have been masterful in their ability to reframe what is essentially a health issue to a human rights issue, and when you talk human rights, everyone gets paranoid," he said.

"When you introduce the possibility of change, you introduce the possibility of freedom to choose, and when you do that, you undermine the foundation of the gay agenda," he added.

Homosexual high school students were more likely than non-homosexual students to have engaged in high health risk behaviors, including alcohol, cocaine and inhalant use.

By the age of 30, some 30 percent of homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead of AIDS; by the age of 50, about 50 percent of homosexual men will be HIV-positive, NARTH said.

NARTH estimates the homosexual population in the United States to be between 2 percent and 2.5 percent. Nicolosi said it was difficult to estimate the number of ex-homosexuals, people who once considered themselves homosexual and changed their orientation through reparative therapy and are now leading lives as heterosexuals.

"These are people who still are ashamed to come forward because our society doesn't understand or appreciate their struggle," he said. Ex-homosexuals should be encouraged to come forward and tell their stories, he said.

E-mail a news tip to Lawrence Morahan.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

And here’s how to do that

Take a SAD. Send him through reparative therapy, see if he can live a fulfilled normal life.

From your own postings on this thread, (which you have never disputed) the cured SAD feels content and fulfilled after sex with his wife. He lives a fulfilled normal life.

Seems that by your own postings you prove that reparative therapy works.

SAD is not just about sex. And reparative therapy doesn't deal just with sexual desires. The key is correcting the defect that underlies the sexual desires. When this defect is cured the condition can be cured.

Lets look at it another way for just an instant.

I really love cheese cake. I'd eat cheese cake every day for every meal if I could. I've always loved cheese cake. This does not make me any different from anyone else. My desire for cheese cake does not define who I am. It is merely something I choose to do.

Now if I ate cheese cake to the uncontrolled abandon that I'd like to I would quickly weigh several tons which would be unhealthy for me and for all those around me.

I can, however, train myself to like sugar free apple pie just as much as cheese cake and live a perfectly dessert fulfilled life. (happens all the time both in babies and in diabetics, desires are remarkably malleable)

I have the ability to be cured of my cheese cake desire, I just have to admit that I can be cured.

Like most SADs and SAD enablers you refuse to even admit the possibility of a cure even when one is proven effective. You do have the right to live in ignorance, but you do not have the right to stop others from becoming free of this plague. Why do you insist on trying to keep them trapped in this sickness?

GSA(P)

The Upper Register

"Theonomy

Lee Irons, Common Theonomic Arguments

This brief "cheat sheet" attempts to provide succint responses to some of the more commonly employed arguments for theonomy.

Lee Irons, The Reformed Theocrats: A Biblical Theological Response

A summary of Kline's critique of theonomy. It also sets forth some positive political principles, the most important of which is "the cultic boundary" between church and state. To see how the political principles espoused here could be applied, see the article below by Misty Irons.

Misty Irons, A Conservative Christian Case for Civil Same-Sex Marriage

Advocacy of the state's right to sanction civil same-sex marriage in no way implies advocacy of the morality of same-sex activity. The Bible clearly teaches that homosexual activity is sinful. The church should exercise church discipline over its members who engage unrepentantly in the sin of homosexual activity. Misty does not spend much time defending these points, but assumes them in order to launch an argument concerning the role of the state in this area. Since her argument presupposes Kline's conception of the state as a common grace institution, it may be helpful to read her argument in conjunction with the essay above.

Walter Olson, An Invitation to a Stoning: Getting Cozy with Theocrats

This article by Walter Olson shows that the gay community is not unaware of the anti-homosexual political agenda of many theonomists. Note that Olson and the other contributors to The Independent Gay Forum are independent thinkers critical of the radical politics common among many on the gay left. Are we willing to be critical of the radical politics common among many Reformed people on the right? What are the implications of the Reformed community's tolerance of theonomy for our gospel witness before a watching world?"

Tipping Point - AndrewSullivan.com

"TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO WEBSITE HAS GONE BEFORE ....
Cyber-space. The final frontier. Want to help make it work? If you like andrewsullivan.com and want to support it, thanks for making it to this page. Very few people are making web-journalism pay for itself, so here's your chance to prove the cynics and nay-sayers wrong. Please help us to keep this website on the air.
If you'd like to become a full-scale donor and contribute $100 or more, the only reward we can offer is our eternal thanks and a listing below..."
Bronze Sponsors ($100 - $499)
Lee & Misty Irons - Sherman Oaks, CA

"Bronze Sponsors" of a homosexual web site?

(Google Search)

Oh cut the crap.

I won't cut it, but I will shovel it back in your face now that you have dealt us all a load.

EdReform disinformation posts usually lead to sites that spout false rhetoric and most are asking for a Godly donation to fight that Ole Time Religion fight of We's Betta Than Them. So send $$ now so we can stop it.

While I don't agree with all of EdReform's posts and the source material, such sites and the organizations that sponsor them are the ONLY alternative to the mainstream media's rubber stamp and promotion of whatever the Gay-stapo spits out. THEY CALL THE SHOTS! That is a fact beyond reasonable doubt, and if you doubt it, it's willful ignorance.

Here's an example of this fact, circa yesterday:

[Rosie] O'Donnell has taped an interview with Diane Sawyer to air as a two-hour show on ABC's PrimeTime Thursday on March 14, to talk chiefly about the case of two gay men in Florida who face having a foster child they raised removed from their home. State law won't let them adopt. O'Donnell also is a foster — and adoptive — mother.
Before the show, O'Donnell told USA TODAY she chose to talk to Sawyer because she wanted an investigative piece on Florida's ban on gay adoption. She told Sawyer if that was done, "I would like to talk about my life and how (the case) pertains to me."

Rosie told ABC News she wanted a story, and they capitulated. Rosie said "Jump!" and Diane Sawyer said, "How high?" Rosie ordered a story on gay adoption, and David Westin delivered it like a Domino's driver. Don't tell me they don't have more power than any other pressure group in the USA, and if some other group does, I would like to hear which you think contends with them.

I mean it. Don't chicken out. Who?

These "preaching techniques" are as old as time -- been watching and reading the "send money for Christ" since I was a teenager (a full generation ago) and pop (a hard-line conservative social christian) used to get these. It's all about money and much less about actually solving the problem: To wit ~~ EdReform pages: (snip)

Well, here we go. "It's all about money..." If it isn't hatred and bigotry that conservative religious organizations are being accused of, it's baseless charges of fleecing the flock. That response really put the "jerk" in "knee-jerk."

I don't know about the finances of the AFA or NARTH or groups like Eagle Forum or Leadership U. or CWFA -- however, you seem to presume they are crooks simply because they are asking for donations. How weak can you possibly get? Talk about "disinformation" -- you got something to back up your allegations besides your memories of your father's mail?

While the queer radicals are passing the hat and raising money all over the country for their political issues, candidates, and agenda, those who wish to meet them on the battlefield of ideas are supposed to do so armed with altruism and nothing else?

I dare you to name an organization that stands for change -- either political, social, religious, or financial -- that doesn't hold out its hand in some way and ask for assistance. And if you read the piece, you would have noticed that it took NARTH years to raise the funds necessary to compile a booklet countering that deceptive, dishonest, and bigoted "Just the Facts" publication that was mailed to every school district in the country in 1999.

Think it's cheap to operate a website? Ask Jim Robinson!

Regardless of the intentions of the organizations that EdReform has linked to, how many of the reports are erroneous? Even if you don't believe that reparative therapy is legitimate, do you believe that teaching children to experiment sexually is acceptable behavior? Do you believe in using materials specifically designed to undermine moral values taught at students' homes? Do you believe in putting books that glorify pedophilia on schools' reading lists? Do you believe in the suppression of speech and expression in the name of "diversity" and "safety" for supposedly gay children?

In short, "serious1" -- are you so determined to object to what EdReform posts that you are willing to swallow everything the queer radicals give you?

Please tell me the source of this evidence. Either URL's or printed citations would be fine.

Try “Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con” by Andrew Sullivan or “The Case for Same-Sex Marriage” by William N., Jr. Eskridge. You can find both of these books here.. The statistical evidence given is mostly in the form of informal survey. It denotes a desire but not necessarily practice of monogamous relationships by homosexuals. I did a quick search for official scientific research in this matter, but was unable to find anything authoritative. That’s why I stress this is my opinion and that I’d like to see a comprehensive study.

Remember that it’s hard to study the effects of gay marriages because there aren’t any. There are however, a number of long-term homosexual relationships as illustrated in the above texts.

A comprehensive study might not support your premise.

Such is the price of objectivity. My opinion might just be wishful thinking. I cannot say for certain that the sanctioning of gay relationships would increase homosexual monogamy and reduce the transmission of venereal disease. That however is my hope.

"However, there have always been a large percentage of homosexuals who do not engage in this activity..."

Again, I'd ask that you please cite the source(s) for this information.

Let me define this as people who have primarily homosexual attractions who do not engage in promiscuous behavior. I define promiscuous behavior as a large number of sex partners (or more so then the heterosexual mean). The one Internet source was a survey from the CDC showing the frequency of sex partners among homosexual and heterosexual populations. You’ll note that many homosexuals have few sexual partners while a few have a very large number – which inflates the averages. This backs up my anecdotal evidence.

I have also read articles in various journals, but since this isn’t the topic of this thread, I won’t look them up for you. That’s a topic for a different thread.

From your own postings on this thread, (which you have never disputed) the cured SAD feels content and fulfilled after sex with his wife. He lives a fulfilled normal life.

I have no problem with someone who chooses to go that route. If they are content and satisfied, who am I to take that away? I’ve said this before. It is my opinion that they trade their sexuality for social acceptance by their peers. For some this is a good trade, for others it is not. We’ve been through this before, and now we are just going in circles.

I do have a problem when people use fraud and force to push reparative therapy in order to advance a political agenda. Fraud involves unsubstantiated claims – and no, if they are not attracted to women they are NOT heterosexual. Force involves the anti-sodomy laws in force in 2/3 rd’s of US States. Once again, we’ve already been through this.

It is my opinion that reparative therapists may be sincere in their efforts but they end up using their patients to brace their worldviews. Maybe they have some part of the puzzle of why some people develop homosexual desires in lieu of heterosexual desires. But they allow their biases to undermine their objectivity. As a result they embrace unfounded and discredited assumptions about male behavior and as a result advocate unsound techniques. Then they refuse to submit their procedures and results for peer review and spin their findings. That’s my opinion, and I’ve already explained how you can change it.

I really love cheese cake….I can, however, train myself to like sugar free apple pie just as much as cheese cake and live a perfectly dessert fulfilled life.

Sex is not a type of food - sex is food. The need to love and be loved by someone to whom you are attracted is a fundamental human need. When you tell a homosexual to be heterosexual you aren’t taking away cheesecake, you are telling them never to eat. The result is starvation.

Like most SADs and SAD enablers you refuse to even admit the possibility of a cure even when one is proven effective.

The key words here are “proven effective”. Reparative therapy is very limited in what it can do. It does not change a homosexual into a heterosexual. Perhaps researchers will someday find a valid method of altering sexual orientation. Right now, they don’t.

You do have the right to live in ignorance, but you do not have the right to stop others from becoming free of this plague. Why do you insist on trying to keep them trapped in this sickness?

Why do you insist on assuming I’m ignorant because I don’t agree with you? Furthermore, how am I forcing people not to engage in the therapy? If homosexuals wish to utilize reparative therapy they certainly don’t need my approval. I’m just expressing my opinion that it doesn’t work.

But I disagree that gay men and women are trying to destroy the family; they are just trying to get along.

redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes, but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution...

The most subversive action lesbian and gay men can undertake --and one that would perhaps benefit all of society--is to transform the notion of family entirely."

First off Gay activists don’t speak for all homosexuals, just like Rev Phelps (you know, Mr. God Hates America) doesn’t speak for all social conservatives. It’s a common rhetorical trick to find the most radical member of a political opposition and claim he represents the views of the majority.

Secondly, given that homosexuals cannot adhere to society’s moral codes, it only makes sense to wish to change them for self inclusion. Remember until recently, the accepted moral codes prohibited interracial marriage. Did you support changing them? If so, are you a family destroying radical?

Second, we can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.

How does opposition to conservative churches destroy marriage?

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.