Monday, March 20, 2006

Moral Authority or Hate Speech?

Several days ago, I made a post at another blog (a blog that obviously has an ideology that totally disagrees with Talkwisdom) on the question of moral authority. I decided to write a comment there because of the constant insults being hurled at a friend and his ministry at that blog.

Of course, I knew that I was allowing my views to be trampled upon and mis-represented. I knew that it would be skewered, mis-labeled and seen as a negative influence by people who hold opposing views. I presumed that I would be entering into a hornet's nest of disagreement, ridicule and disparaging remarks. But I was curious as to how people might respond to the moral authority question that I had posed. For clarity, I will bring the post over here. I think it may be helpful to the discussion and purpose of today's post.

"OK. I know that I am entering into the proverbial hornet's nest by posting here, but I couldn't help noticing your comment and authority ranking at the Technorati 'morality' blogfinder listing.
This ex-gay watch blog happens to be listed at #3. My Talkwisdom blogspot happens to be listed at #18. I'm not sure how they establish such rankings. Perhaps it has a lot to do with the amount of hits.

You will notice that our blogs are totally opposite as far as morality is concerned. Yours tends toward the secular-humanistic, morally relativistic realm while mine is geared towards the God-given Christian moral absolutes as contained in God's Word, the Bible.

Anyway, at the Technorati rankings page, I noticed this little blurb under your blog title which describes one of the reasons for your blog's existence:

"Offering news and analysis of ex-gay politics. Encouraging exgays to think outside the box."

Well guess what? I'd like to invite those who might be willing here, to think outside the 'gay activist/indoctrination box.' Anyone willing to do that?

Hopefully, we will be able to start and maintain a civil dialogue without the obvious name-calling that you constantly use towards Stephen's ministry and radio program. We'll see by the reactions to my posts, I guess...

Brokeback Mountain: A Christian Response

The Cross: Liberating Desire"

The first few reply posts accused me of being insulting and uncivil. I wonder what they call their mistreatment of my friend? Free speech seems to only belong to the liberal left these days. Sharing an opposing point of view is labeled as "hate speech." This leads into the subject of this post.

One person replied:

"but if exgaywatch was into moral relativism they wouldn't criticize the ex-gay movement, because they'd believe that there's nothing morally wrong with lying."

I answered:

"That's exactly why moral relativism is a hard concept to live by. The rules change so frequently. Must be a lot of truth to the fact that moral absolutes do exist.

Indoctrination could be a concept that exists 'in the eyes of the beholder'. Your view of Stephen's "lying" is debatable too. Is there absolute truth being presented here at this blog? Perhaps there is a lot of lying going on at this ex-gay watch blog...who is to judge?

OK. You label what goes on here then...

You must admit, we do come from totally polar opposite sides concerning the political, spiritual, and moral issues spectrum. So, don't you find it uncanny that Technorati rated these two opposite blogs as authorities in morality? It brings into question from where moral authority originally came from; does it not?"

Finally, amidst the various comment posts one person admitted:

"I'm not sure why you are asking for morality from a search engine - they work on how many others are reading and linking to each site."

Notice the they part. Someone PROGRAMMED the web crawler to CHOOSE which blog(s) are ranked in the moral authority realm of thought. And, what could be considered worse is that the person's ideology may have been at work in the process. So, again, who is the ultimate determiner of moral authority? What (or whom) does Technorati use as it's arbitor of such authority?

For arguments sake, let's take another subject. The subject of encouragement. At the Technorati site, Talkwisdom happens to be listed as #6 among 29 blogs that include topics of encouragement. From what (or Whom) does Technorati use as it's arbitor of such authority? Could it be that because of the many Bible verses and references to Jesus Christ that Talkwisdom got such a ranking?

Hmmmm....would love to find out! But then again, it's only a web crawler device that has done such a ranking. The arbitor is probably just some anonymous person out there in cyberland.

But the bigger question is, "Ultimately, from whom does our encouragement stem from?" People are imperfect, finite, and can (and do) disappoint us in a myriad of ways. How can we appoint one of "us" to be the truthful arbitor for this subject...or any subject for that matter?

One person at the disagreeing site tried to answer and the answer was almost there...except for one huge error.

"as a secular humanist I can assure you there is only one moral absolute I need to follow and that is to put fairness first, to follow the golden rule."

He went on to say:

"it should be painfully obvious where moral authority comes from and it isn't a supernatural source. Moral authority comes from an agreement of cooperation between people - it is entirely a human construct. With no agreement there is no moral authority."

Well THAT'S certainly dangerous. The Nazis had such an 'agreement of cooperation between people'; were an 'entirely humanistic construct' and 6 million Jews were viciously tortured and horribly executed during one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century...the Holocaust.

He was correct when he said, "With no agreement there is no moral authority." However, he leaves out the One with whom we need to agree in order to combat evil when it rears its ugly head and not let man's sin and evil behavior interfere with the moral good.

OK. We all know the golden rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Well, one problem with that as the only basis in moral judgment is what if a person happens to think that it's perfectly OK to torture babies for fun (Greg Koukl's line) and also enjoys being tortured himself/herself? Whose to say that it is wrong? The golden rule is not a sufficient answer.

There must be more to it than that.

Where can the line between good and evil be drawn?

Who decides?

Why?

I'd like to segue into my new post, now. I have been noticing an increasing amount of posts/columns that have to do with what constitutes "hate speech."

The first that I want to draw attention to was written by Doug Patton at The Conservative Voice website. He makes the accurate point that hate speech is often viewed in the eyes of the beholder because someone, somewhere, has been offended.

"Everyone is offended these days. Muslins… Jews… Atheists… Blacks…Hispanics… Homosexuals… Native Americans… You name it. The list goes on and on and on. In fact, we are not even surprised any more when lawsuits are filed and complaints are registered over “offenses” real or imagined."

Near the end of his article, Doug reiterates the concept of certain groups being offended and states that Christians are the one group in which discrimination is still acceptable.

" 'I’m offended' has become the new national slogan. Everyone, it seems, is expected to be offended. Everyone, that is, except Christians, the last group against whom discrimination is still acceptable. From media to our public institutions, the prejudice is blatant, but nowhere more so than in our government schools."

He lists several examples, one of which involved the Columbine tragedy:

"At Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, site of the 1999 student massacre, ceramic tiles were placed above student lockers in tribute to those who died that day. Of the 2,100 tiles, 90 were systematically removed by school officials because they had messages written on them like “God is Love” and “4/20/99, Jesus wept.” These messages were deemed “objectionable.”

Next, we have this.
Alain's Newsletter site is labeled as "hate speech" by Google. Here are many additional articles about this incident:

Google's Golden Moment
Does Google Consider the Bible Hate Speech?
I Admit It; I Am Filled With Hate

There are probably dozens more that I could link here. But the ultimate question(s) still remain.

"From where, and Whom does absolute moral authority come from?"

"From where, and Whom, does all authority come from? "

How one answers such questions determines how we will live in this world and where each of us will end up in eternity.

The current culture war displays the reality (and consquences) of such polar opposites in worldview. One side wants to demonize Christian people of faith and label the greatest Book in the world as "hate speech." The other side knows the Person of Jesus Christ and recognizes Him for who he is...as the moral authority in their lives. Jesus said, "Your Word is truth" to God the Father concerning the authority of the Bible. Christians recognize the Bible as God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.

2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5

No wonder Jesus told us:

John 8:32 - And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

17 comments:

Boo said...

Let's see, first you tell me I should find another blog to comment on, then you takes quotes from other blogs by me and put them here.

I still have no idea why you're going on with this straw-man argument you've constructed. No one at exgaywatch claimed that Technorati was any kind of moral authority. Technorati itself, as far as I know, does not claim to be a moral authority. Their rankings are not intended to establish moral authority, because they are JUST AN INTERNET SEARCH ENGINE!!! They rank blogs that deal with moral issues according to how much traffic they get, that's it. There is no ideology involved in Technorati's ranking process. It's pure math. If you get 100,000 hits and another blog that deal with morality gets 80,000 hits, you rank ahead of them. As far as I know, exgaywatch does not run Technorati, so I'm not sure why you assumed it was exgaywatch's responsibility to answer for them in the first place.

I also recall asking you for specific instances of the exgaywatch blog owners mistreating Stephen, I notice you did not provide any. I'll say it again, calling him on his copious lies and misrepresentations is not hate speech.

You also seem to be (I hope unintentionally) perpetuating the same misconception you came to exgaywatch under. That blog and this one are not polar opposites in terms of morality. No one among the owners or regular commenters (excluding the occasional troll) espouses moral relativism, and many are Christians. It is not the responsibility of anyone at exgaywatch to engage you in a debate on a position they do not hold.

You wrote:

"The current culture war displays the reality (and consquences) of such polar opposites in worldview. One side wants to demonize Christian people of faith and label the greatest Book in the world as "hate speech." The other side knows the Person of Jesus Christ and recognizes Him for who he is...as the moral authority in their lives. Jesus said, "Your Word is truth" to God the Father concerning the authority of the Bible. Christians recognize the Bible as God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error."

This is exactly the kind of mindset that caused you problems over at exgaywatch. You've really got to do some thinking about this us v. them Manichean worldview you seem to be espousing. There are an awful lot of people who do acknowledge the God of Abraham and the Person of Jesus Christ as the supreme moral authority but still disagree with you on any number of issues. It seems to me that you're the one doing the demonizing by trying to corral all of your opponents into "the secular humanist worldview" under the dominion of Satan. That seems to be why it's difficult for you to engage people who don't share your views 100%- because once you find out someone disagrees with you on something you put them in the enemy camp and then they become "secular humanist liberal moral relativist" whatever. It just doesn't work that way. Until you realize that, you're not going to be able to engage in any productive debates.

Christinewjc said...

Hi Boo,

I just worked on a reply (that took me an hour!)and lost it when my server unexpectedly went down. I will try to post again later. Wish I had saved it before that happened...

Christinewjc said...

One point that I made in my erased post was that Jesus said that the signs of the time of his return would be that the world was "like the days of Noah and Lot."

Christians need to beware of siding with the current secular humanistic ideology and worldview that plagues our nation today. This very thing is warned about in the book of Jude. (see below)

The days of Noah and Lot were known for the sexual perversions and immorality that went on.

Luk 17:26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.


Luk 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.


Luk 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;


Luk 17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed [them] all.


Luk 17:30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.


Luk 17:31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.


Luk 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.


Luk 17:33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.


David Guzik commentary:

4. (26-30) The coming of the King will be a great surprise

a. By showing the similarity to Noah's day, Jesus describes a world that is functioning in a "business as usual" way when He returns; people ate, drank . . . married wives, they were given in marriage - things are carrying on just as they were
b. In the same way, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah before the destruction of those cities, so it will be before the coming of Jesus - life will be pretty much business as usual, until sudden destruction and judgment comes


i. Significantly, there are other passages of Scripture that seem to show that Jesus will return to an earth that will be anything but business as usual
ii. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor shall ever be. (Matthew 24:21)

iii. And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, and said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! (Revelation 6:15-16)


c. Which will it be? Business as usual, or hell-on-earth? The two distinct "phases" of Jesus' coming, separated by some period of time, explains the seemingly contradictory conditions which describe the condition of the world at the return of Jesus
d. Jesus' use of the accounts of Noah and Lot as pictures of His coming shows us something important: in each case, God delivered His people, then He brought down judgment


i. And, in each case, only those who sought after God were ready. Are you ready?

5. (31-33) Prepare for the coming of the King by not being attached to this world

a. When Noah's flood came, you could imagine people trying to vainly keep their possessions safe while they themselves perished; even so, if you are ready for Jesus' coming, you won't be concerned about all the stuff you leave behind. Your heart won't be on what you have in house, but on what you have in heaven
b. Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt as she and her family escaped from Sodom; it was because she looked back (Genesis 19:26). Will you be caught looking back at the what there is in the world?


i. The awesome reality is this: God will give us what we really want. When we really want the things of this world, God will let us have them - for a while. But when we really want the things of God, God will also let us have them - forever.
ii. The good news is that His people do want these things, even though they battle against the flesh regarding them. God will finish what He has begun in you!


6. (34-36) When Jesus comes, some will be taken suddenly and others will be left behind

a. This passage is often applied to the rapture, a term applied to Jesus' coming for His people in the midst of a business as usual world

i. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:16-18)

b. You won't have time to prepare for the rapture - it will come suddenly and at an unexpected moment. The way to be ready is to be ready now
c. Significantly, Jesus points to the fact that it is day in one part of the world while it is night on another; at the same time some are sleeping at night, others are working in a field. God will come for His people all over the earth at one moment

d. Just as in the days of Noah and Lot, when Jesus comes, some will be taken out of the way and others will remain and be judged


7. (37) All this will happen at the time when judgment is ripe

a. When? What does Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together mean? William Barclay says this was a common proverb meaning that a thing would happen when the necessary conditions were fulfilled
b. Geldenhuys on the saying about the eagles: "where the spiritually dead people are, there the judgment will be executed". "Where that which is ripe for judgment is present, there also will the judgment take place."

c. Are the conditions ripe for judgment in our day?


i. The Bible describes certain political, economic, spiritual, social, and military characteristics regarding what the world will be like before His return - suffice it to say that these conditions are amply set today - the stage is set
ii. 2 Timothy 3:1-5 tells us what the world will be like in the last days: But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: for men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! Does this sound like today?

Jude

Greeting to the Called
Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James,


To those who are called, *sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ:


2 Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you.
Contend for the Faith
3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord *God and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Old and New Apostates

5 But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. 9 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!" 10 But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves. 11 Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.

Apostates Depraved and Doomed

12 These are spots in your love feasts, while they feast with you without fear, serving only themselves. They are clouds without water, carried *about by the winds; late autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, pulled up by the roots; 13 raging waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame; wandering stars for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him."

Apostates Predicted

16 These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage. 17 But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: 18 how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. 19 These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.
Maintain Your Life with God
20 But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
22 And on some have compassion, *making a distinction; 23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the *fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.
Glory to God
24 Now to Him who is able to keep *you from stumbling,
And to present you faultless
Before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy,
25 To *God our Savior,
*Who alone is wise,
Be glory and majesty,
Dominion and *power,
Both now and forever.
Amen.


Footnotes:
1:1 NU-Text reads beloved.
1:4 NU-Text omits God.
1:12 NU-Text and M-Text read along.
1:22 NU-Text reads who are doubting (or making distinctions).
1:23 NU-Text adds and on some have mercy with fear and omits with fear in first clause.
1:24 M-Text reads them.
1:25 NU-Text reads To the only God our Savior.
1:25 NU-Text omits Who . . . is wise and adds Through Jesus Christ our Lord.
1:25 NU-Text adds Before all time.

God's Word does not change. It is people who attempt to make His Word say something than what was originally intended. Hundreds of years of exegesis and hermenuetics may be challenged by those who hold to their own ideas of what they want God's Word to say, but it will never succeed at convincing the very elect.

Mark 13:22 - For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect.

Mark 13:23 - But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.

Boo said...

And that all had... what to do with what we were talking about?

Just saying over and over that everyone who disagrees with you about anything is part of "the secular humanistic ideology" doesn't make it true.

You're a Muslim, Christine.

You're a Muslim.

You're a Muslim.

You're a Muslim.

Now did saying that make it true? I doubt it.

Boo said...

And if you're looking to get some moral authority, why not get all your religious right friends up in arms and see if you can do anything about this:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1746943&page=1

Christinewjc said...

Boo,

Boo said, "And that all had... what to do with what we were talking about?"


When one adheres to a similar ideology/worldview as the secular humanist (doesn't acknowledge God or Christ) while claiming to be a Christian (Christ in one) is most certainly relevant to our conversation.

You made the claim that other Christians do not agree with me and I'm pointing out to you that perhaps these other Christians more accurately do not agree with what God's Word says! I used Scripture to point this out, not my own words or political stance.

The story about the Muslim convert to Christianity being subjected to the death penalty for doing so shows the terrribly unfortunate extremism inherent in the Muslim religion as well as the reality of persecution against Christian believers worldwide. We need to keep fellow believers, especially this particular man, in our prayers and petitions to God.

Boo said...

And you determine what God's Word is, apparently. You often cite Scripture verses that have no bearing on the subject under debate, such as citing Ezekiel to prove that Sodom was condemned for homosexuality when Ezekiel doesn't mention homosexuality or even sex at all. When I cited Scriptures forbidding women from teaching or cutting their hair short, you did exactly what you condemn others for doing: you interpreted Scripture in such a way so as not to condemn yourself, and you did it, ironically enough, by citing cultural context. For whatever reason, you're not willing to allow others the same freedom you exercise. Thus I declare shenanigans again.

My point with the Afghan story- the religious right has a lot of influence with the guy who happens to be the commander in chief of the 22,000 odd US troops controlling Afghanistan. Wouldn't it be something if the religious right used its political access to actually accomplish something positive for once, like preventing somebody from being killed or declared insane just because they're a Christian? Imagine if, like, the TVC, the AFA, Focus, and allies all walked into the Oval Office and said "Get this guy out, or forget about our support in November."

Christinewjc said...

Wow!! Talk about homosexual propaganda!! I just read Part I and Part II over at Alain's Newsletter that exposes for all the world to see what is truly going on in our current culture wars concerning "gay" rights and all that it entails.

Talk about some very powerful arguments!

They are each very long articles...but well worth the read to discover just what is really at work within the pro-homosexual agenda.

The portion about the current overt (and sometimes covert) utilization of the George Orwellian type of "Newspeak" (similar to the kind used in the book, Nineteen Eighty-Four) chillingly shows how propaganda can be slyly incorporated into the minds of an unsuspecting public.

An excerpt:

"The chief means employed by propagandists to achieve control is by the subtle manipulation of language. For decades now, neo-liberal groups (i.e., feminists, abortionists, environmentalists and homosexuals) have been busy reinventing the language of politics. This “semanticide,” as I like to call it, has been carried out with the redefinition of reality as its principal goal.

Of all the neo-liberal groups, none has used language more advantageously than homosexuals have. The new vocabulary has advanced the “gay” agenda on every imaginable battlefront: from the halls of Parliament and Congress and the courts, to the classroom, church pew, and marketplace. As such, the redefinition of the political language must be regarded as one of the most formidable weapons in the “same-sex rights” arsenal.

The most pervasive category of neo-liberal “semanticide” is Newspeak, a deceptive misuse of language that is utilized to achieve a desired political or social effect. The term was first coined by the prescient British author George Orwell in his world-renowned novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Newspeak was used to denote a fictional language developed by an equally fictional totalitarian regime to render all forms of free thought and subversion nonexistent.

Although the language itself was fictional, the principles behind it are not. As Orwell stated, “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink.” He also wrote, “The purpose of Newspeak [is] not only to provide a medium of expression for the [totalitarian] worldview …. but to make all other forms of thought impossible [emphasis added].”

Newspeak is employed by neo-liberals to numb the conscience and befuddle the mind. As such, Newspeak generally consists of meaningless “feel good” words and phrases that work to lull the target audience into inaction."


Dare I say that this is the goal of certain groups and websites that want to change the language of moral authority and blatantly call it "hate speech"?

It certainly appears to me that the true motive(s) of such groups have been brilliantly exposed in these two articles! Can't wait to read Part III!

Christinewjc said...

Part III

Christinewjc said...

There is a lot to read in Part IV, however I wanted to share one important paragraph:

"I will state here and now - and without hyperbole or equivocation - that the only way the militant homosexual activists and their neo-liberal heterosexual allies will ever be able to eradicate “homophobia” will be by eradicating those people who quite rightly and rationally oppose sexual perversion. We Christians, in particular, fall into this category because we are largely immune to the effects of “lavender” propaganda by virtue of our dependence on Scriptural authority.

Christinewjc said...

Another great article: Sexual Liberty vs. American Liberty . The Politics of God, Family, and Country

Here's an excerpt:

"St. Augustine long ago discoursed that authentic freedom was a condition of the moral man, not of the man enslaved by lust or desire for power. Aldous Huxley noted this correlation himself when he observed, “as political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase.” (Introduction to Brave New World, 1946.) By contrast, tranquility is the condition of the moral man, and a moral man cannot be controlled. In his compelling book, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control, E. Michael Jones traces the roots of the sexual revolution from its beginnings through the end of the Clinton impeachment proceedings . “Reason, especially morals,” he writes, “is the sole source of man’s ability to govern himself. Once gratification of passion becomes the definition of “liberty,” then “liberty” becomes synonymous with bondage because he who controls the passion controls the man. [This type of] liberty… becomes a prelude to the most insidious form of control known by man precisely because it is based on the stealthy manipulation of his passions.”

(bold mine)

Boo said...

Wow, another right-wing diatribe pouncing on Kirk and Madsen. Who'd have thought it? This one is even more bizarre than usual. According to part 2, we know gay people are bad because they use acronyms, and acronyms are evil. Okaaaayyyyy...

Even weirder stuff in part 3:

"The birth of militant homosexual activism was due in large part to a growing view among homosexuals that they constituted a sort of “community.”"

Um... an identifiable grouping of people who interact with a common purpose is by definition a community.

"Thus, homosexuals wanted a term that was self-designated, not a label that they were beginning to believe (or so they stated) was “imposed” on them by those people they regarded as “the enemy.”"

He's completely correct that people have no right whatsoever to come up with terms for themselves, which is why we should still be calling black people "darkies." If it was good enough for whites to use early in the 20th century, it should be good enough for everyone today. A group coming up with a positive term for itself is proof positive of said group's inherent evil and dishonesty.

"The most-used circumlocution in AIDSpeak was “bodily fluids,” an expression that avoided troublesome words like “semen.”"

This "circumlocution" also has the advantage of being more medically accurate, since blood is also a transmitter of the virus, but who cares about medical accuracy when there are gay people to demonize, I guess.

"The tremendous volume of medical evidence that has been accumulated on homosexuality for close to a century tells a vastly different story. Homosexuality is an undesirable condition (i.e., a psychosexual pathology) that is characterized by compulsive, or “obligatory,” unnatural sexual behavior. This behavior is often grossly unhygienic and physically traumatizing. Same-sex sex facilitates the transmission of devastating, often fatal diseases. Homosexuals by and large are more susceptible to suicide and substance abuse (i.e., psychological dysfunction) than are heterosexuals: and no, “homophobic straights” are not to blame for this, despite all of the propaganda that claims they are."

But of course he can't actually cite any of these "studies," because they're, um... a secret. Yeah, that's the ticket.

"Reinhard Heydrich (the “Blonde Beast” of the Gestapo), Ernst Roehm (Hitler’s right-hand man and commander of the dreaded Sturmabteilung, or SA – at least until he was murdered during “the night of the long knives”), Julius Streicher (the infamous “Jew-baiter”), Rudolf Hess (another one of Hitler’s best buddies who was also known as “Fraulein Anna”), and other high-ranking members of Germany’s Nazi Party were all “gay.”
And finally, der Fuehrer Adolf Hitler was himself “gay” – his sham marriage to Eva Braun notwithstanding."

Of course, there's no actual evidence that any of those men except Roehm were gay, and Hitler had him executed, but if you say it often enough, that might make it true. (And for every gay serial killer he names I could name you at least 20 straight serial killers)

"In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association was intimidated by militant homosexuals into striking homosexuality as a mental illness from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual ofMental Disorders (DSM-II)."

Ah yes, the teeny tiny gay minority somehow seized control of the entire mental health profession, so completely in fact that no one will even talk about it out of terror at having their homes redecorated or something. We gays are even better at Secret World Domination than the Jews, apparently.

I suppose it's fruitless to point out that Brent Gideon didn't have any actual evidence to back up any of his accusations, and did not actually cite any dishonest behavior on the part of any gay person? Post-modernism is a false god, Christine. Reality is not whatever anyone says it is.

Btw, according to Worldnetdaily, those nasty anti-Christian Europeans seem to be taking a much harder line against the Afghan Christian convert being executed than the Bush administration is, but don't let that stop you from railing about how the European Secular Humanists are all conspiring to eliminate Christians.

And just because Gideon repeatedly compares gay people to Nazis and the totalitarian nightmare of 1984 and says it's normal and good to loathe gay people, that doesn't make him or his speech hateful. Nope, not a bitty-bit.

Christinewjc said...

Boo,

Since I have just a few moments to post this morning, I will just post some statistics and information that I have already collected (many from reputable sources with indisputable results like the CDC, AMA, and Medical Institute of Health) that prove the terrible health dangers and consequences of homosexual sex acts. Also included are reasons to oppose the propaganda being promoted to our children.

*******

The following comments include an article that was written in 1997. It shows the mindset (back then, as well as now) behind the militant gay rights radical agenda currently permeating our schools (even to preschoolers!), the media, and the culture and exposes what their true goals really are. We can further see why adding sexual orientation to hate crimes laws is actually a veiled attempt to prevent Christian free speech in opposition to their indoctrination ploys. The arrest of 5 Christian evangelists at the Outfest event in Philadelphia demonstrates the unjust application such 'hate crimes' laws would impose upon free speech of Christian and/or any other religious groups that object to, and oppose, the blatant exposure of pro-gay agenda being "normalized" throughout our culture. Thankfully, true justice prevailed in this case and today is the day that all charges were dropped against 4 of the Christians. The 5th person is a teenager who is expected to have all charges dropped against her within the next few days.

Can anyone admit that "WE TOLD YOU SO" is in order?

Christine

************************************************** *******

It's 1984 in Massachusetts – And Big Brother Is Gay
Author : BobfromMichigan74 Date : 12/19/01
Dear John, I have 560 subscribers to my Yahoo Groups email list. Your article just about sent me over the top. In answer to Terrence, I would remind him that homsexuals are perverts, misfits, biological errors (Thank you Dr. Laura) and sex addicts. Ann Heche is an example (Ellen De-generates ex-lover who has now renouced lesbianism and married a man) that proves homosexuality is a learned behavior very similar to drug addiction. Below is an earlier article, same topic, author unknown to me. BobfromMichigan74@hotmail.com +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PROVINCETOWN INTRODUCES SODOMY TO PRESCHOOLERS Homosexual "Change Agents" Facilitate Implosion of American Culture Last week the school board in Provincetown, Mass. voted to begin educating preschoolers about homosexual lifestyles, according to an article in the Washington Times. The board also decided in favor of hiring preferences for "sexual minorities," a move that puts Provincetown on the cutting edge of the homosexual agenda. "We are on a trailblazing path," said Susan Fleming, superintendent of Provincetown schools. "We are going to be a change agent." Provincetown is a homosexual enclave on Cape Cod. Nearly half of the town's parents are homosexual, as are the school's top officials. Jeannine Cristina is a lesbian that has a bi-racial daughter in a Provincetown school - a daughter she conceived through artificial insemination. Miss Cristina is also the president of the Provincetown PTA and the one who initially pushed the pro-homosexual school board decision. The adopted seven-point plan broadly calls on the school system to reject "bias" in curriculum. The stated goal is to equip "students, teachers and the community at large with the tools needed to combat racism, sexism, ableism, classism, heterosexism and homophobia and all forms of oppression...." To teach this "anti-bias" curriculum the school system will "search for, hire and retain a diverse staff, including sexual minorities." (Source:The Washington Times, "Provincetown Preschoolers to Learn ABC's of Being Gay," August 21, 1997). Miss Cristina remarked that the success of her proposal is "truly a milestone in education." "I'd be so excited to have this happen across the nation," she said. "But the reality is a lot of work has to be done across the country, and hopefully Provincetown will be the model." Miss Cristina also won the help of local homosexual activist John Perry Ryan who explained that the plan is to end the "dominance" of the perspective of the "white Europeans...who are also very heterosexual, very Christian, very male." (ibid.) President Clinton was vacationing at Martha's Vineyard, about 40 miles from Provincetown, when the school board approved the "anti-bias" plan. Proponents urged the White House to endorse it, but there has been no reaction as of yet. The lack of response is characteristic of the president when confronted with an explosive issue. One may be assured that the silence does not mean indecision, because the president has several militant homosexuals in his administration and his Hate Crimes conference, scheduled for November 11th, plans to address America's "bias" problems. Provincetown and President Have Same Plan In case Miss Cristina is feeling put off by the Clinton's silence about her plan for America, all she needs to do is review his radio address of June 7, 1997. In that address the president announced his planned White House conference on hate crimes, and announced his initiative for the eradication of those "biases" that are the target of the Provincetown plan. On the surface the president's address was full of the usual benign cliches and platitudes, however, the trained ear may discern the trumpet call for another assault in America's culture war. Like George Bush's speeches during the Gulf War, President Clinton's June 7th address was liberally sprinkled with globalist Newspeak. He said, "...as we move into a new century with its global economy and its global society, our rich diversity is a powerful strength...", a powerful strength for the ruling elite, that is, as the American social fabric is ripped to shreds by "diverse" counter cultures, making the enslavement of all more certain. Hate Crime - Daring to Think or Speak the Truth Clinton lamented, "We still have our ugly words and awful violence, our burned churches and bombed buildings." He neglected to explain that this violence is often the effect of the culture war he is nurturing and supporting with his high office. He hinted at a remedy for the "ugly words" that he deems to be the cause of our troubles when he said, "...it is time for us to mount an all-out assault on hate crimes, to punish them swiftly and severely, and to do more to prevent them from happening in the first place." (emphasis supplied). This collectivist solution will not only include a punishment of illegal acts committed, but the restriction of "hate speech" as defined by the cultural elites, and the cleansing of our personal "biases" or "thought crimes" by the cultural "thought police." Clinton went on to say, "...the fight against hatred and intolerance must be waged not just through our laws, but in our hearts as well.... It is just not enough to prevent acts of violence to our bodies, we must prevent acts of violence to our spirits.... Even a small number of Americans who harbor and act upon hatred and intolerance can do enormous damage to our efforts to bind together our increasingly diverse society." (emphasis supplied). In other words, "We must change the beliefs of those who are intolerant of our perversity. As society becomes more corrupt and degraded (diverse), many are likely to become upset by small groups of people reproving our perversions and exposing our lies. These individuals can do enormous damage to our efforts to consolidate complete control over the masses." NEA and Public Education - Potent Weapon of Cultural Subversion Clinton also warned in his address that "a newborn child today does not know how to hate or stereotype another human being; that behavior must be learned," and this is the basis for the Provincetown plan to teach preschoolers about homosexual lifestyles. The earlier a state-run school can get a "head start" against the values and cultural mores of the past, the better chance they have at producing international children of the future. The ruling elites in today's brave New World Order recognize that their battle for global control will be won or lost in the classroom. Public school teachers who teach cultural "diversity" are the lap dogs of the ruling elite. The NEA (National Education Association) passes resolutions every year that are road maps of the planned society of the future. At the NEA's 1996 convention, over one-third of the delegates sported "NEA - GLC" (Gay Lesbian Caucus) buttons, and the NEA-GLC newsletter announced eleven caucuses related to its agenda. (Source: Eagle Forum, "Gay Lesbian Caucus Flaunts its Influence"). Homosexuality permeates the NEA, which dominates public education, which in many ways determines the future of the United States. The NEA and the AFT (American Federation of Teachers) have a combined annual revenue of $1 billion and form the single most powerful block within the Democratic party. They were solidly behind Bill Clinton during his election in '92 and, since then, they have worked together to accelerate the destruction of America's biblically derived values and distinctive culture. Public Schools Introduce Perversity at Tender Age - Institutional Child Molesters It is not possible here to definitively list the controversial resolutions passed by the NEA. It will suffice to list a sampling of them. For example, the NEA is against homeschool programs and "if homeschool study occurs...instruction should be by persons who are licensed by the appropriate state agency...(with a) curriculum approved by the state" so the student receives approved "diversity" training, no doubt. (Resolution C-34, 1988). "Funds must be provided for programs to alleviate race, gender and sexual orientation discrimination and to eliminate portrayal of race, gender and sexual orientation stereotypes in the public schools." In other words, the taxpayers should fund programs that promote homosexuality as a moral superior to normal sexuality and suppress traditional father-mother roles in the curriculum. (Resolution A-13, 1996). "The (NEA) supports early childhood education programs in the public schools for children from birth through age eight...include(ing) mandatory kindergarten with compulsory attendance." Remember, the earlier the better. (Resolution B-1, 1996). The cultural elite of the New Order recognizes the futility of changing people who are set in their ways. At the same time, they are patient enough to mold society over time by capturing the tender minds and souls of children through education. A puppet of Socialist experimentation by the name of Adolf Hitler spoke of this in November, 1933 when he said, "When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already...What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.'" This belief was echoed by an article in The Official Journal of the American Humanist Association (1983) where the writer declared, "I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly view their role as the proselytizers of a new faith.... The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new; the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of Humanism...." So the change agents in education work diligently from coast to coast, introducing sexual perversion and promiscuity to ever younger minds, training them up for a life of mindless enslavement. Occasionally there is a convulsive reaction to this agenda, as there was in New York City in 1994 when school superintendent Joseph Fernandez was fired by the school board. Among the causes for his dismissal was his multicultural Rainbow Curriculum which placed such material as "Heather Has Two Mommies, Daddy's Roommate and Gloria Goes to Gay Pride" on the first grade reading list. After his dismissal he gave a speech entitled, "Trials and Tribulations of being a Change Agent" in Orlando, Florida, evidently referring to his suffering for the cause of truth. (Source: Florida Pro-Family Forum). The list of abominations in public education goes on and on, from proposed school-based clinics offering condoms and sexual advice to grade schoolers, to intense counseling and discussion groups where the child's values are challenged without parental knowledge, not to mention the desecration of everything associated with the straight white male. In this day pubic schools are nothing less than institutional child molesters. Society Destroyed Through Process - It's Too Late The ruling elite of the New Order are promoting homosexuality and promiscuity for a manifold purpose. Their global agenda for population control is one motive, and another is their nearly completed plan to destroy the culture and social fabric of the nations where "men were men" and the women were cherished and protected - where strong families and stable communities were the bedrock the nation was built on. A promiscuous, perverse and dysfunctional population is much easier to control, manipulate and enslave. Many professed Christians and political conservatives insipidly deny that it is too late for the United States and the world, but the truth is this nation has lost its culture, and it is too late to redeem it. What began with "tolerance" of immorality, the "innocent fun in the rumble seat" grandpa used to talk about led to greater and greater evils until this nation found itself being sodomized at the point of a gun in the contemporary culture war. It is too late to turn back. Now the deluge. The militant homosexual agenda is one of the sledgehammers used in America's cutural demolition. This agenda is not just about equal rights - it is revolutionary in its scope and aims to recreate society in its own image. In her book, "The Hidden Homosexual Agenda," Beverly LaHaye wrote, "The homosexual ideology implies the intent to rearrange our perceptions, lifestyles, and legal system. In the strict sense of the term, this change is revolutionary. It requires, if it is to be effectively implemented, the careful and gradual application and transfer of power. The homosexual movement is thus not primarily a philanthropic or educational enterprise, but a hard-nosed political movement bent on changing our society." Nowhere is this truth more shockingly portrayed than in this essay on the homosexual agenda, written by "gay revolutionary" Mark Swift and printed in the Feb. 15, '87 issue of Gay Community News. These excerpts are reprinted from the Congressional Record: "We shall sodomize your sons....We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms...in your youth groups.... Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding.... They will come to crave and adore us. All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men. Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable.... We shall raise vast, private armies...to defeat you. The family unit...will be abolished. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory.... All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men. Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks." What does the future hold for the United States and the rest of the nations swept into the net of the global culture? We may find the answer to this question by sifting the ashes of Sodom and Gomorrah. Written 8/28/97
*******

Sometimes, even lesbians can be honest and show despair at what is happening with the constant promotion of gay behavior in our public schools. Note the following replies.

It's 1984 in Massachusetts – And Big Brother Is Gay
Author : sorhoho Date : 12/20/01
I must tell you that I believe teachers have gone entirely too far! I am a lesbian, and given the circumstances described would not hesitate to pull my children out of these schools. I would go even further though, and contact the powers that be and work to change the laws that allow such abuse of power. Including and not limited to running for office myself.
In my viewpoint, what the teachers are propagating is no more nor less than child sexual abuse, and should be prosecuted as such. Having lived through the horror of sexual abuse as a child, and knowing how it has affected my decisions as an adult, these teachers are my worst nightmare. Imagine being abused at home in secret, then having that behaviour re-inforced, again in secret, at school! School was the one place where I knew I would be safe. I shudder to think what would have happened to my psyche if I had not had that refuge!
Please! Someone stop this insanity before it goes further!

************************************************** ********


It's 1984 in Massachusetts – And Big Brother Is Gay
Author : minuteman2 Date : 12/18/01
DEAR JOHN,AFTER READING YOUR ARTICLE I WILL NEVER LET MY CHILD ATTEND A PUBLIC SCHOOL.I BELIEVE IN LIBERTY AND IT'S AMAZING THAT THE CROWD THAT WANTS TOLERANCE AND UNDERSTANDING ARE'NT WHEN YOU WANT TO REMOVE YOUR CHILD FROM THEIR SCHOOLS.LIBERALS WILL NEVER QUITE COMPREHEND WHY HOME SCHOOLING WILL CONTINUE TO EXPAND AND GROW.THANKS FOR THE INSIGHT.AS SOMEONE WHO HAS HAD TO LISTEN TO THIS IN COLLEGE IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEONE EXPOSED THIS.SINCERELY.RANDELL PITTMAN.

*******

*******
The unhealthy sexual acts of homosexuals is the cause of much disease, deformity and premature death. A lifetime of anal sex is not safe or healthy. Ask any doctor. Yet gay activists want to teach such things to children as young as 5 years old? That's evil...dirty and simple. There is much evidence that homosexuality is a learned behavior. Did you know that 80% of homosexual men have been sexually abused or sodomized as children? The liberal pro-homosexual media won't share that statistic with the general public...they wouldn't want to appear homophobic.

The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports "homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices," while "women who have sex with women are at significantly higher risk of bacterial, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women."

The Center for Disease Control reports men involved in homosexuality are 860 percent more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases, partially because they "have large numbers of anonymous partners, which can result in rapid, extensive transmission of STDs ... threaten(ing) national HIV infection prevention efforts."

"Gay men of all ages remain at an alarming risk," the CDC warns, while "young bisexual men are a 'bridge' to women," threatening not only their own lives but the general population.

"People with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders," the Journal of the American Medical Association reported in January, citing Dutch findings that males involved in homosexuality are 727 percent more likely to suffer a bipolar disorder, with greater risk of obsessive-compulsive disorder (718 percent higher), panic disorder (421 percent), mood disorders (311 percent), and major depression (234 percent).

Anticipating homosexual activists' typical victimhood claim - that health risks associated with homosexuality are somehow "caused" by organizations that publicly oppose their political agenda - the study noted that "the Dutch social climate toward homosexuality has long been and remains considerably more tolerant" than other counties.

Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports "life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is eight to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday."

Homosexual behavior is up to three times deadlier than smoking. Society nonetheless condemns, restricts and spends millions of tax dollars to discourage the lesser threat (tobacco), while irrationally contemplating laws to protect and force social acceptance of the greater (homosexuality).

Our laws should discourage, not enable such deadly behavior.

The risk of bacterial, breast and ovarian cancer is higher in lesbian women than heterosexual women. Facts are facts! And...bisexual men pose an even greater risk to women, serving as a "bridge" of disease to them.

My main concern, and the reason I found this article is because I am doing research on the harmful effects that GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network) is promoting to children in our nation's public schools through their GSA (Gay Straight Alliances). Just go to the Massachusetts News Archive at http://www.massnews.com/past_issues...ols/fistarc.htm and you will be shocked about what has happened as a result of these two vile organizations. One does not need to be a scientist to deduce that homosexuality and/or promiscuity does not produce happiness. Ask the 56 million Americans who are infected with a sexually transmitted disease if that disease brings them pleasure or fun. At the infamous "Fistgate" conference at Tufts University in March 2000 the children were told they could make an “informed decision” not to use a condom. In this day and age of AIDS and STD’s the attitude of these “educators” is not only unscientific but borders on the criminal. AIDS reduces the average life expectancy by almost 50 percent. Twenty-year old active homosexuals are finding it difficult to live past the age of forty. The truth is, amorality, such as homosexual activity, does not provide a happy, fulfilling life. Its hallmarks are disease, discouragement, deformity and death. To claim otherwise is unscientific. Speaking of science, according to Dr. George Rice, a neurologist at the University of Western Ontario, results of the sequencing of the human genome do not support the theory of a “gay gene.” Ideas about the origins of sexual preferences are reverting to the argument that homosexuality is a decision rather than an inherited trait. Also, one's "homosexuality" is often thrust upon an individual by childhood molestation and/or poor familial relations. In fact, in an audio tape of a former gay man (who lived in the gay lifestyle for 9 years) recovered from his homosexual addiction, and has been married for the past ten years. He has two children and is very concerned about GLSEN's militant agenda in public schools. He stated on the tape that his ten year research has discovered that 80% of gay men were either molested or raped as children!! Homosexuality is not a light matter and certainly is not a lifestyle that should be pushed on our children. The dangers of being gay come from the individual’s behaviors associated with gayness rather than the supposed harassment from “homophobes.” The perverted sexual activities are dangerous to the human body and ought never be practiced, let alone suggested in high school. According to the Family Therapy Networker, the high-risk decision-making habits of teens is a result of “shifts toward brain regions that are governed by emotional reactivity.” As a result, teens are drawn toward destructive behaviors such as drinking, taking drugs and experimenting with risky sex. Homosexuals hijacked the word “gay” and changed its original meaning. Ask any giggling middle school student when they sing the refrain, “now we don our gay apparel.” As a pro-moralist, I declare that the word “homophobe” should officially have it’s meaning permanently changed to the following: 1. People who believe that steering kids away from homosexuality is compassionate; promoting it under the guise of “fighting hate” is tragic and cruel. 2. People who object to the schools forcibly exposing their children to harmful sex instruction that conflicts with their values. 3. People (especially parents) who recognize that their rights are being eroded, trivialized and targeted for destruction by homosexual militants. 4. People who believe that schools can teach civility toward all without teaching that homosexual behavior must be accepted as normal and healthy. 5. People who recognized and are alarmed by the fact that the “hate crimes” curriculum is a tool by homosexual activists to advance their agenda of recruiting children. GLSEN’s “sexual orientation” theory presented to children is a blatant attempt to persuade those who are sexually confused to try the homosexual lifestyle. 6. People who recognize that leftist education elitists have no right to indoctrinate children with their immoral political or social beliefs. We need to ensure that school is about academics – not about immoral beliefs. Gay activists know that by undermining the values taught by parents, the hearts and minds of children can be changed. Therefore subversion, not tolerance, is their goal. 7. People who know that, “ there are powerful and convincing scientific and social grounds supporting our position that homosexuality is a harmful lifestyle that gays and lesbians can leave if they choose,” as stated by Jeffrey Satinover M.D. in his book “Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.” 8. Parents who discovered that some homosexual groups are leading the effort to lower or abolish “age of consent” laws which currently prohibit adults from having sex with children (pedophilia). This is what has developed over the years as a result of the now exposed fraudulent scientific basis of the 1953 Kinsey report. Did you know that in order for Kinsey to obtain his “data” nine pedophiles molested and raped children aged anywhere from infancy to age 10 for Kinsey, who, interpreted the tears, groans and violent cries from the children to be “sexual climaxes”? Yet, despite all of this disturbing information, taking a stand against the gay agenda in public schools can lead to public vilification. “If you protest,” says Brian Camenker of the Parents Rights Coalition of Massachusetts, “be prepared to be stone-walled and sneered by public officials, smeared in the press, and denounced as a hate-monger and a bigot by gay activists.” Yet what choice is left to parents but to fight? “We’re facing an incredible evil here. It chills you to the bone.” Says Camenker, an Orthodox Jew brought closer to his faith by this struggle. “The only way we’re not going to get run over is if people wake up to what’s happening to our children.” “These people are bullies,” he continues, “People are afraid of them, afraid of being called homophobes. I don’t enjoy this, but this is America, and I’m not going to run away.” I’m not going to run away either, Brian.

*******

More at message board.

Boo said...

So in response to my debunking an illogical, over-the-top, hate-filled rant against gay people, you decide to post an even more illogical, over-the-top, hate-filled rant against gay people? Do you even read these articles before posting them?

Should I go through this debunking every single claim again? Would it do any good? Will anything get through to you?

Oh, what the heck...

"The arrest of 5 Christian evangelists at the Outfest event in Philadelphia demonstrates the unjust application such 'hate crimes' laws would impose upon free speech of Christian and/or any other religious groups that object to, and oppose, the blatant exposure of pro-gay agenda being "normalized" throughout our culture."

If you had read up on the case you would know that the Repent America people were arrested not merely for expressing an opinion, but for harrassing people, barging into the parade waving their signs, and refusing to leave. This is the same kind of behavior your hero David Kupelian condemned when ACT-Up engaged in it:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46887

so why is it ok for Repent America but not ok for ACT-UP?

"In answer to Terrence, I would remind him that homsexuals are perverts, misfits, biological errors (Thank you Dr. Laura) and sex addicts. Ann Heche is an example (Ellen De-generates ex-lover who has now renouced lesbianism and married a man) that proves homosexuality is a learned behavior very similar to drug addiction."

I don't even know where to begin with this one. If homosexuality is a "biological error," then how can it be a "learned behavior?" Anne Heche never "renounced" lesbianism. If you recall she never claimed to be a lesbian. While dating Ellen she basically claimed to be bi. She has also disavowed her mother's ex-gay activism:

http://www.exgaywatch.com/blog/archives/2005/09/anne_heche_as_w.html

"PROVINCETOWN INTRODUCES SODOMY TO PRESCHOOLERS"

Provincetown teachers were sodomizing schoolchildren??!! That's just SICK!!! Oh wait, they were doing nothing of the kind. What they're actually saying is that Prvincetown has a lot of gay people in it and they're teaching kids in the schools that gay people exist and should not be tormented. Oh, the horror!

"Hate Crime - Daring to Think or Speak the Truth Clinton lamented, "We still have our ugly words and awful violence, our burned churches and bombed buildings." He neglected to explain that this violence is often the effect of the culture war he is nurturing and supporting with his high office."

Yes, because it is a perfectly understandable response to commit violence and arson if you don't like the idea of gay people having equal rights. Can I clue you in on something, Christine? The great Christian Persecution that you fantasize The Homosexual Agenda will somehow come to enact, where Christianity is legally suppressed, Christians are arrested for preaching their faith, and the like? Turn that on its head. That's what gay people HAVE ALREADY LIVED WITH. It's also very interesting to stop and consider that the burned churches Clinton was referring to were predominately black churches in the South. I wonder just how many "culture wars" this guy is preparing to fight.

"This collectivist solution will not only include a punishment of illegal acts committed, but the restriction of "hate speech" as defined by the cultural elites, and the cleansing of our personal "biases" or "thought crimes" by the cultural "thought police.""

Actually, that's not what Clinton said at all:

"Clinton went on to say, "...the fight against hatred and intolerance must be waged not just through our laws, but in our hearts as well.... It is just not enough to prevent acts of violence to our bodies, we must prevent acts of violence to our spirits.... Even a small number of Americans who harbor and act upon hatred and intolerance can do enormous damage to our efforts to bind together our increasingly diverse society.""

What he actually said was that we must suppress the hate in our hearts. NOT THROUGH THE LAW. The next part is standard wacky NWO conspiracy mongering.

"The list of abominations in public education goes on and on, from proposed school-based clinics offering condoms and sexual advice to grade schoolers, to intense counseling and discussion groups where the child's values are challenged without parental knowledge, not to mention the desecration of everything associated with the straight white male."

But of course, he can't give us any actual examples, because, um... the militant homosexuals won't let him. Yeah.

"Society Destroyed Through Process - It's Too Late The ruling elite of the New Order are promoting homosexuality and promiscuity for a manifold purpose. Their global agenda for population control is one motive, and another is their nearly completed plan to destroy the culture and social fabric of the nations where "men were men" and the women were cherished and protected - where strong families and stable communities were the bedrock the nation was built on. A promiscuous, perverse and dysfunctional population is much easier to control, manipulate and enslave."

Yes, society will soon be destroyed by the (never identified) "ruling elites," just because the elites want something to do. Only Mulder and Scully can save us from the secret plan to use the Black Oil Virus to mutate us all into aliens!!! Beware the Cigarette Smoking Gay Man!

"What began with "tolerance" of immorality, the "innocent fun in the rumble seat" grandpa used to talk about led to greater and greater evils until this nation found itself being sodomized at the point of a gun in the contemporary culture war."

While I've never been sodomized at the point of a gun, I imagine it would hurt. I'm curious Christine, who do you know who's been sodomized at the point of a gun?

"In her book, "The Hidden Homosexual Agenda," Beverly LaHaye wrote, "The homosexual ideology implies the intent to rearrange our perceptions, lifestyles, and legal system. In the strict sense of the term, this change is revolutionary. It requires, if it is to be effectively implemented, the careful and gradual application and transfer of power. The homosexual movement is thus not primarily a philanthropic or educational enterprise, but a hard-nosed political movement bent on changing our society.""

And if anyone can telepathically read the thoughts of every homosexual in the United States, it's Beverly LaHaye. Although that begs the question of why she isn't out hunting down terrorists for the CIA. Maybe her telepathy only works on homosexuals?

"Nowhere is this truth more shockingly portrayed than in this essay on the homosexual agenda, written by "gay revolutionary" Mark Swift and printed in the Feb. 15, '87 issue of Gay Community News. These excerpts are reprinted from the Congressional Record: "We shall sodomize your sons....We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms...in your youth groups.... Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding.... They will come to crave and adore us. All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men. Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable.... We shall raise vast, private armies...to defeat you. The family unit...will be abolished. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory.... All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men. Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.""

Of course, the guy who read this essay into the Congressional Record somehow neglected to include the first sentence, which identifies it as a parody:

http://rainbowallianceopenfaith.homestead.com/GayAgenda.html

"Michael Swift" is a play on Jonathan Swift. The piece itself is an obvious allusion to Swift's "A Modest Proposal." But hey, if anti-gay ideologues had to actually be honest, they'd really be up a creek.

"There is much evidence that homosexuality is a learned behavior. Did you know that 80% of homosexual men have been sexually abused or sodomized as children?"

The militant homosexuals are no doubt preventing "minuteman2" from telling us where he got this statistic.

"The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports "homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices,""

Said increased risk is a result of promiscuity. Promiscuity is a cultural problem in the gay male community. Like any cultural problem, it can be changed. Gay marriage is one of the things which can change it.

"women who have sex with women are at significantly higher risk of bacterial, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women."

I notice he doesn't say why exactly that is, namely childbearing, fear of (and experience of) prejudiced doctors, and a greater tendency to smoke (and I can't imagine why people who have experienced enough prejudice to be afraid to go to a doctor might have a greater tendency to smoke):

http://www.cancerpage.com/news/article.asp?id=1547

"The Center for Disease Control reports men involved in homosexuality are 860 percent more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases, partially because they "have large numbers of anonymous partners, which can result in rapid, extensive transmission of STDs ... threaten(ing) national HIV infection prevention efforts.""

Again, due to anonymous promiscuity. Integrate gay men fully into society, and you'll likely get a lot less anonymous cruising.

""People with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders," the Journal of the American Medical Association reported in January, citing Dutch findings that males involved in homosexuality are 727 percent more likely to suffer a bipolar disorder, with greater risk of obsessive-compulsive disorder (718 percent higher), panic disorder (421 percent), mood disorders (311 percent), and major depression (234 percent).

Anticipating homosexual activists' typical victimhood claim - that health risks associated with homosexuality are somehow "caused" by organizations that publicly oppose their political agenda - the study noted that "the Dutch social climate toward homosexuality has long been and remains considerably more tolerant" than other counties."

More tolerant is a relative term. All of the conditions noted could easily be caused by societal homophobia (which is not quite the same thing as saying they're caused by "organizations that publicly oppose [the gay] political agenda" I've never heard anyone claim that. It's the entire society, starting off, usually and unfortunately, with the gay individual's own family. Gay men in the Netherlands did not grow up in a completely accepting society. One of the basic rules of scientific research is that correlation is not necessarily causation.

"Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports "life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is eight to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday.""

Except that paper is quite out of date:

http://grantdale.customer.netspace.net.au/Update_of_Hogg_00.html

He might still be able to use it in the "culture war" to justify black church burnings, tho.

"One does not need to be a scientist to deduce that homosexuality and/or promiscuity does not produce happiness. Ask the 56 million Americans who are infected with a sexually transmitted disease if that disease brings them pleasure or fun."

There are 56 million gay Americans? Wow, that's a lot. Oh wait, most of those people are straight. I guess you don't have to be a scientist to deduce that heterosexuality does not produce happiness.

"Twenty-year old active homosexuals are finding it difficult to live past the age of forty."

Any time you hear about homosexuals not living past 40, it comes from Paul Cameron. Paul Cameron has exactly zero credibility in the scientific community. He was kicked out of the APA for misrepresenting research, he has been disavowed by every major professional social science body, and the last time he offered expert testimony at a trial, the judge basically called him a liar:

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/Rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html

"Ideas about the origins of sexual preferences are reverting to the argument that homosexuality is a decision rather than an inherited trait."

So much for Dr. Laura. Of course, once again he offers nothing to substantiate his claim.

"Also, one's "homosexuality" is often thrust upon an individual by childhood molestation and/or poor familial relations. In fact, in an audio tape of a former gay man (who lived in the gay lifestyle for 9 years) recovered from his homosexual addiction, and has been married for the past ten years. He has two children and is very concerned about GLSEN's militant agenda in public schools. He stated on the tape that his ten year research has discovered that 80% of gay men were either molested or raped as children!!"

Ok... my ten year research has discovered that 80% of the population of Wyoming likes to eat poop. I can't actually show you any of my research tho, because it's, um... secret.

"Homosexuality is not a light matter and certainly is not a lifestyle that should be pushed on our children."

Given that homosexuality is not a "lifestyle," I agree.

"Homosexuals hijacked the word “gay” and changed its original meaning."

Just like negro people hijacked black!!! The fiends!!!

As a pro-moralist, I believe that the word "nutjob" should have its meaning changed to: 1. People who believe that homosexuals recruit children. 2. People who believe that homosexuals are pedophiles. 3. People who believe anything that comes out of Paul Cameron's mouth. 4. People who knowingly reprint satire out of context as though it's serious. 5. People who make scientific claims without ever producing evidence. 6. Minuteman2 7. People who claim to read minds. 8. People who think homosexuals were created in Alfred Kinsey's lab.

So basically all you've got is a six year old sex education conference where a question about fisting was asked and answered, and someone may have said something irresponisbly vague about condoms. There is legitimate debate to be had about how graphic sex education should be with teenagers. The rest of this is a joke.

Saltnlight said...

With all the ridiculous claims that homosexuality is a trait that one is born with rather than something a person can change, I have a question.

When someone comes to the public arena and says they were homosexual for over thirty years yet today are no longer that way, what gives anyone the right to say this is a lie?? A list of previous lovers, numerous neighbors who witnessed the behavior of homosexuality or lesbianism and saw the many one night stands and even the ones who stayed for years with this person. Even so, there are people in the homosexual camp that want to call them a liar.

There are many things that play a part in bringing about one’s desire to have same sex affairs and thus cause that title to be applied. There is nothing, however that can bring legitimacy to the idea that one is born this way. There is nothing that can be said that will make someone who has come out of this behavior to be a liar.

With all that said it is sad to think that the agenda of homosexual activists is so bent on the destruction of youth that they will not allow the truth to be told. There is not equality in the arena of debate and certainly not in the arena of our public schools etc. Our kids are being given one side and one only, the side of the activist homosexual and that is wrong. We are destroying our children and their right to stay children in allowing this immorality into their world.

Homosexuality is not alone in this destruction but it is the portion of a great iceberg hidden deep beneath the surface. Homosexuality is one of the last immoral behaviors, it will break the back of our country and soon it will lead to God’s wrath being poured out on humanity. This has been the way since Sodom. I am a believer in what God has said in His Word. What He has said is quite clear concerning our sexual sins. Saltnlight

Saltnlight said...

How about this for an exciting comment??
"The truth is that if homosexuality had met our deepest needs for male affirmation and acceptance, had filled our "father hunger," had helped us individuate from our over-identification with women, and otherwise been emotionally fulfilling and satisfying, most of us probably would never have pursued change. But instead of fulfilling us, homosexuality left us feeling empty, longing for something more authentic.

That's because the core need never was for sex with a man, or romance with a man. The core need was a little boy's longing for male affirmation, to feel like one of the guys, to be held and loved by his father. How many times have we heard, "I had sex with him because I wanted to be hugged and held. Sex was just the price I had to pay to feel like a man could love me"?

For us, homosexuality could be like drinking salt water in an attempt to quench our thirst. The more we drank, the more we craved. Sure, it felt pleasurable at the time. But afterward, we often felt only more alone, more isolated, more unloved. It was so easy to become sex-obsessed in the pornography- and lust-saturated culture that is so dominant in the gay community. It was so difficult to feel connected to God or some kind of higher purpose in a life where the mantra seemed to be, "If it feels good…nothing else matters."

Boo said...

Well saltnlight, I guess if that's what homosexuality is for you then you should try pursuing celibacy or something. It sounds like you have a very unhealthy sex drive.