Replies

fyi:

Conclusion: The Danger of ``Gay Rights''

Scott Lively

I am writing this conclusion to the third edition on the same day that President Bill Clinton has called for ``hate crimes'' legislation based on ``sexual orientation'' (code words for homosexuality). A few days ago, in an act unprecedented in the history of the presidency, Mr. Clinton aligned himself with the homosexual cause at a fund-raiser for the Human Rights Campaign Fund, the ``gay'' movement's largest political action committee. Knowing what it cost this president in 1993 to endorse ``gays in the military,'' I am wondering what ``gay'' leaders might have promised the president in exchange for this new endorsement. Or can it be that public perception of the ``gay'' movement has changed so much that the Clinton administration (notorious for its reliance on polls and ``focus groups'') has decided that it is now safe for the president to identify himself and his office with the ``gay'' political agenda.
This question has personal significance for me, since I was one of the few people to publicly challenge then-candidate Clinton on his support for ``gay'' issues during his first run for presidential office. In response to my questions during a live Town Hall television program (simulcast from Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon), Mr. Clinton said he was against promoting homosexuality as a valid, alternative lifestyle to young people. At that time he also affirmed the right of the Boy Scouts to exclude ``gay'' scout leaders.
I raise this issue to contrast the benign public image of ``gays'' with the face of the ``gay'' movement that we have seen in these pages. Those whose perceptions of the ``gay'' movement have been shaped primarily by the popular media may find President Clinton's actions appropriate, even laudable. Such people have been persuaded that ``gays'' are society's victims in need of protection. But the ``gay'' movement I have seen and investigated is neither benign, nor are its members ``victims.'' It is vicious, deceptive and enormously powerful. Its philosophy is Machiavellian and its tactics are (literally) Hitlerian.
What explains the dichotomy of perspectives on the ``gay'' movement? If any of the facts in this book are true, then the image of the ``gay'' movement Bill Clinton would like you to accept cannot be true. Are typical heterosexual supporters of ``gay rights'' simply unconcerned about the association of homosexuality with personal and societal dysfunction and violence? Or have these presumably well-intentioned people been denied complete information?
I have always been cautious of the word conspiracy, yet this is the word which best describes how the ``gatekeepers'' of American popular culture have helped to shape public opinion on this issue. The truth about homosexuality and the Nazi Party (indeed most information that might reflect negatively on the ``gay'' movement) appears to have been deliberately suppressed. We know that so-called ``gay rights'' has become a virtual cause celebre among the self-styled cultural elites in government, academia and the news and entertainment media. Over fifty years ago Samuel Igra also observed that homosexualism ``had become a veritable cult among the ruling classes'' in Germany prior to the rise of Hitler. I have come to believe that America's cultural elitists, perceiving themselves to be the moral arbiters of our society and the protectors of ``gays,'' have used their power and their positions to protect and shield the ``gay'' movement from all unfavorable publicity. More than this, they have colluded to promote an image of ``gays'' as sterling citizens.
When I initially learned the truths contained in this book, I was first astonished and then angered. Why had this information never surfaced during the many months in which the Oregon campaign to stop the ``gay'' agenda was continually being compared (in the local and national media) to the Nazi regime? The information is certainly not hidden. Anyone with the most basic research skills could easily find many of the two hundred-odd sources we have cited in this book. Are we to believe that the hundreds of trained journalists, college professors and politicians who helped guide the debate on that campaign (and many similar events) failed to discover any of these sources? We must assume that at least some of these professionals knew of these facts but decided not to inform the public. At best this represents an appalling level of arrogance (allowing that they might have disregarded these facts as not credible -- denying ``common'' people the right to make up their own minds). The more plausible (and more frightening) conclusion is that the facts were withheld because of their likely negative impact on the ``gay'' movement.
``Gay'' political power derives in large part from the public perception that homosexuals are victims. As Kirk and Pill so baldly admitted in The Overhauling of Straight America, ``gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector.'' What would happen to the protective instinct of Americans if they knew that many of the worst villians of the Third Reich were ``gay''? How closely would America scrutinize the ``gay'' agenda if ``homoeroticism'' were revealed as the very foundation of Nazism? (This is a movement which would not survive such scrutiny). The evidence points to a conspiracy of silence -- a nearly universal self-censorship by the same opinion-makers who mock conspiracy theories and decry any form of censorship.
If the facts in this book are true, and if it is also true that the ``gatekeepers'' of our public information are deliberately keeping these facts from us, can we hope to educate our fellow citizens before the ``gay agenda'' plunges this nation into social chaos? The outcome is uncertain. Surely, however, there have been times in the past when the inevitable repetitions of history were derailed by a few warning voices. It is our hope that the facts we have presented here will penetrate the ``fog'' of media-sponsored misinformation and ``political correctness.''
Have we exaggerated the urgency of our task? I think not. The future of America, indeed of civilization itself, depends upon the preservation of the natural family -- God's model for effective human society and the training ground for healthy human relationships. Yet the goal of the ``gay'' movement is the devaluation of the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic (monogamous heterosexual family-centered marriage) and its replacement with a ``gay'' affirming pagan alternative.
The ``gay'' movement in America (as contrasted with the German version) is different in style but not in substance. It remains characteristically selfish and hedonistic, but more importantly it continues to be defined by what it is against: Judeo-Christian family-based society. This ``gay'' vision for America is best defined in a widely circulated satirical essay written by a homosexualist under the pseudonym ``Michael Swift'' (probably to remind us of the political satire of Jonathan Swift). Although the writer intends to discredit this view of the homosexual agenda, its very eloquence (in the context of our study) belies this attempt. Echoing from the ancient Spartan culture, from the Teutons, from the Knights Templar, from the SA under Ernst Roehm, and now from the American ``gay rights'' movement comes this, our final glimpse into the fascist heart of homosexualism:

This essay is outre, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed dream of being the oppressor.
We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools [Project 10], in your dormitories [forced homosexual roommates], in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups [Wandervoegel , Boy Scouts], in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses [``gays in the military''], in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons will become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.
Women, you cry for your freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy [radical feminism, lesbian separatist movement]. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of men. Then go ahead and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand with depth and feeling the mind and body of another man.
All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked [anti-discrimination ordinances, minority status based on homosexuality]. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men [graphic ``pro-gay'' sex and AIDS education, mandatory ``sensitivity training,''].
All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially [the muli-faceted and powerful ``gay rights'' movement]. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy [suppression of internecine conflicts and other negative information about homosexuals by the homosexualist dominated media].
If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead puny bodies [``hate crimes,'' speech codes, fines].
We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man [the play Bent and a multitude of others; the lesbian counterpart in the television show, Ellen]; we will make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens [Hollywood promotion of homosexual ``love-making'' and of the ``gay rights'' agenda in movies and television]. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas [public funding of homosexual pornography by the National Endowment for the Arts, National Public Broadcasting Service]. The museums of the world will be filled only with the paintings of graceful, naked lads.
Our writers will make love between men fashionable and de rigeur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles [invention of ``gay-speak'' -- ``gay,'' ``homophobia,'' ``diversity,'' ``sexual orientation'']. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule which we are skilled in employing.
We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals [outing]. You will be shocked and frightened when you learn that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere [a commonly used bumper-sticker]; we have infiltrated your ranks [strategic ``surprise'' announcements by ``conservative'' homosexuals, e.g. Mel White, former ghostwriter for Christian leaders]. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.
There will be no compromises. We are not middle class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less [Brand/Friedlander, Fuehrer principle]. Those who oppose us will be exiled [the ``Femmes''].
We shall raise vast, private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you [Rossbach and Roehm, Frederick the Great]. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers [Plato's Banquet ].
The family unit -- spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence -- will be abolished [homosexual ``marriage'' and adoption]. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated [Plato's Republic]. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants [Sparta].
All churches who condemn us will be closed [attacks on the McIlhennys, St. Patrick's Cathedral]. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated [Kummerlings]. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination [Nietzsche, Hitler]. For us too much is not enough.
The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets [Adolf Brand, Stefan George, Plato's ``philosopher-kings'']. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society will be indulgence in the Greek passion [pederasty]. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence [SA leadership]. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.
We shall rewrite history [Holocaust revisionism, extravagant claims that historical figures (like Lincoln) were homosexual], history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man [Hans Blueher].
We shall be victorious because we are filled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages [victim-plunder strategy]. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution [ACT-UP, Queer Nation, blood terrorism].
Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

(By Michael Swift, ``Gay Revolutionary.'' Reprinted from The Congressional Record . First printed in Gay Community News, February 15-21, 1987).

B'' H

Atrocities

Fortunately, America has not experienced the wide-scale atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis in Germany, but the actions of certain male homosexuals in recent history are reminiscent of the worst SS butchers. As noted in a January 21, 1984 editorial in The New York Times, ``Many of the most violent multiple murders have been commited by homosexual males.'' Clowes cites some alarming statistics showing that eight of the top ten serial killers in the United States were homosexuals (below) and that homosexuals were responsible for 68 percent of all mass murders (Clowes:97). The following is a list of nine leading homosexual serial killers, eight of which were among the top ten most prolific killers as of 1992. Clowes' sources are listed in the text and are reprinted from Debating the ``Gay Rights'' Issue:

Donald Garvey: 37 Murders...[a] nurse's aide [who] was convicted of 37 murders in Kentucky and Ohio. Psychologists testified that ``Harvey said he was a homosexual.'' The New York Times, August 20, and August 17th, 1991.

John Wayne Gacy: 33 Murders...[a] professed homosexual ...who killed 33 young men and boys and buried them in his basement. The New York Times, February 22, 1980.

Patrick Wayne Kearney: 32 Murders...The New York Times described him as ``an acknowledged homosexual'' and ``...perpetrator of the `homosexual trash bag murders.''' The New York Times, July 27, 1977.

Bruce Davis: 28 murders...killed 28 young men and boys after having sex with them. The New York Times, January 21, 1984.

Corll, Henry and Owen: 32 Murders. Dean Corll, Elmer Wayne Henley, and David Owen Brooks were the members of a Texas homosexual torture/murder ring that captured and mutilated 27 young men. The New York Times, July 27, 1974.

Juan Corona: 25 Murders...an admitted homosexual, killed 25 male migrant workers. The New York Times, October 4, 1972.

Jeffrey Dahmer: 17 Murders...a convicted child molester and practicing and admitted homosexual, lured 17 young men and boys to his apartment, had sex with them, then killed them and dismembered them. He ate parts of his victims bodies...Dahmer was active in ``gay rights'' organizations and had participated in ``gay pride'' parades. Michael C. Buelow. ``Police Believe Suspect Killed 17.'' The Oregonian, July 26, 1991, pages A1 and A24. Also: ``Relative in Dahmer Case Sues.'' USA Today, August 6, 1991, page 3A. Also October 1991 Focus on the Family Letter.

Stephen Kraft: 16 Murders...killed at least 16 young men after drugging, sodomizing and torturing them. Robert L. Mauro. ``The Nation's Leading Serial Killers.'' The Wanderer, October 31, 1991.

William Bonin: 14 Murders...tortured and killed 14 young men...had sex with his victims before and after they died. Robert L. Mauro. ``The Nation's Leading Serial Killers.'' The Wanderer, October 31, 1991. (Clowes:96)

William Bonin was executed by lethal injection at California's San Quentin prison on February 23, 1996. As reported in the Orange County Register, February 22, 1996, Bonin, the so-called ``Freeway Killer,'' killed at least 21 boys and young men and dumped their bodies along California freeways (our original source mentioned only 14). After having been jailed in the early 1970s for raping boys, Bonin had vowed that in the future ``there will be no witnesses.''
Although various stories reported that Bonin had raped men at gunpoint in the army and had been engaged in sex with a man at the time of his final arrest, the media failed to identify Bonin as ``gay.'' Standard ``gay'' rhetoric denies that male on male child molestation qualifies as homosexual conduct. Here, the perpetrator clearly was homosexual in his adult sexual relations as well, but the ``gay'' label was scrupulously avoided.
Thomas Hamilton of Dunblane, Scotland, is Britain's worst mass-murderer in modern history. Hamilton killed 16 children at an elementary school on March 13, 1996. According to The New York Times, Hamilton was obsessed with boys. Ousted from the Boy Scouts in 1974 for ``complaints about unstable and possibly improper behavior following a Scout camp,'' Hamilton later formed his own boys' club. Once again, children complained that ``he was overly familiar, made them take their shirts off and was obsessed with photographing them.'' Upset that he had been branded a ``pervert,'' Hamilton apparently took his revenge against the town of Dunblane by killing their children.
In a spree of ``gay-on-gay'' violence not seen since Nazi Germany, one homosexual man, Gaetan Dugas, was directly responsible for killing over a thousand homosexual men by deliberately infecting them with the AIDS virus. Indirectly he may be responsible for tens of thousands, eventually perhaps hundreds of thousands of AIDS deaths. One of the first known AIDS carriers, Dugas was known as ``Patient Zero'' because he caused so many of the earliest infections (Clowes:97). Even after his diagnosis Dugas ``justified his continued sodomy with the excuse that he was free to do what he wanted with his own body. Even when he was in the final stages of AIDS he would have anonymous sex with men in homosexual bathhouses, and then show his sexual partners his purple Kaposi's Sarcoma blotches, saying, `Gay cancer. Maybe you'll get it''' (``The Columbus of AIDS.'' National Review, November 6, 1987:19).
As reported in the Marin Independent Journal, February 5, 1996, the first known murder connected to the Internet resulted from a homosexual encounter between two men in East Windsor, New Jersey. After meeting ``through an online chat room, an electronic gathering place for gay men'' they decided to get together. ``But their offline meeting Jan. 4 turned deadly, police say, when George Hemenway shot Jesse Unger in the head, as a 15-year-old boy looked on.'' According to the story, the last homicide in this Trenton suburb of 22,000 was 10 years ago and also ``stemmed from a homosexual `street encounter,' police say.''
Other major news stories have had a homosexual element that assumes greater significance when viewed in the context of the homo-fascist connection. For example, just days after du Pont fortune heir John E. du Pont attracted national attention for his role in a shooting and a dramatic police standoff at his Pennsylvania mansion, details of his bizarre private life began to emerge. A single man who lived with his mother until her recent death, du Pont used his personal fortune to support his hobbies,which centered on traditionally ultra-masculine themes: collecting guns and military artifacts (such as an armored personnel carrier he drove around his estate) and collegiate-style Greco-Roman wrestling.
A Gannett News Service report published in the January 30 edition of the Marin Independent Journal contains allegations that du Pont was a homosexual who used his wealth to recruit others into the homosexual lifestyle. ```You really don't want to hear the whole truth. It would blow you away,' said Andre Metzger, a wrestling coach who sued du Pont for sexual harassment. Metzger said du Pont used the Foxcatcher training facility to gain access `to kids and adults' for homosexual relationships.''