Homosexual rights advocacy

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Decision screen.jpg


Domestic violence
Anti-gay blogs


Gay rights
Don't ask, don't tell

Homosexuality laws
Civil union
California ban

History and

History of homosexuality
Atheist suppression

See also
Cross dressing
Brokeback Mountain

The gay "rights" movement seeks to promote homosexuality and give it special consideration or favoritism.

The gay "rights" movement demands new rights or entitlements for homosexuality by arguing that either,

  1. Homosexuality is somehow an immutable trait, and discriminating against immutable traits is wrong (e.g., race discrimination);
  2. Homosexuality, if not immutable, is highly correlated with personality, and criticism of it is to be censored and labeled as somehow being bigotry; or
  3. Homosexuality is somehow perfectly normal and should be respected, despite God's laws against it in the Bible and scientific device of thought experiment showing otherwise.

So called 'Gay rights' are a favored topic of liberals, and are based on moral relativity, the idea that there is no absolute Right or Wrong. Although people should be free to label themselves as they choose[1], from perspective of human rights, assertions about human nature must be empirically provable and they cannot be based on fundamentals and instances that are not methodologically verifiable[2]. The self-identification as so called "LGBT+ person" fails this criterion[1] and is in fact a manifestation of Göring's syndrome.


Harry Hay is regarded as the father of the modern homosexual liberation movement. As a Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) organizer, he turned out "essays, position papers, critical studies, and manifestos concerning what it means to be gay in the world."[3]

The first step Hay took in organizing the homosexual rights movement was to recommend to the CPUSA that he be expelled. In light of his 18 years of service to the party[4] they released him as "a security risk but a life-long friend of the people." The early leadership of the Foundation shaped the organization to reflect the cell structure of the Communist Party, in which "secrecy, hierarchical structures, and centralized leadership predominated." [5] Hay and his fellow homosexual rights activists began circulating the USSR and the East European Communist parties sponsored anti-war Stockholm Peace petition against the Korean War[6] at a beach frequented by homosexual men in Los Angeles. The first months produced hundreds of members.

Amid growing public focus on gays and lesbians, 91 homosexuals were found to be employed in the U.S. State Department. Congressional investigators discovered homosexuals employed in 36 of 53 branches of Government, as well as in the armed forces. Between Jan. 1, 1947 and April 1950, 4,954 cases had come to light among some three and a half million people in Government service. Most were in the armed services. 574 cases were found involving civilian Government employees; in all the other cases the accused had either quit, been cleared or fired. The investigators found the greatest batch of civilian cases—143—in the U.S. State Department. State had cleared or gotten rid of all but a dozen whose cases were still pending. The Veterans Administration was found to have 101 cases. Others included the Atomic Energy Commission, 8; EGA, 27; Congress' legislative agencies (Library of Congress, congressional employees, etc.), 19. One Senator remarked, "It follows that if blackmailers can extort money from a homosexual under threat of disclosure, espionage agents can use the same type of pressure to extort confidential information."[7]

The Human Rights Campaign referred to Hay as "founder and architect of the modern movement for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights" and "Harry was one of the first to realize that the dream of equality for our community could be attained through visibility and activism".[8] Hay not only promoted homosexual rights, he actively campaigned for the "rights" of pedophiles. The Boston Phoenix noted that nowhere was this more evident than in Hay's persistent support of the right of the North American Man-Boy Love Association, NAMBLA, to march in gay-pride parades.[9] NAMBLA maintains a website with a body of Hay's work and a tribute to Harry Hay on its homepage. The Human Rights Campaign and other homosexual rights organizations, while revering Hay for his contributions to homosexual rights, do not support NAMBLA or communism.


  • Henry Gerber starts Society for Human Rights under a State of Illinois charter for a non-profit organization for people with "mental abnormalities" on December 25, 1924. Several issues of Friendship and Freedom, the first American publication for homosexuals were printed but the organization was shut down by Chicago police. Gerber was arrested but not convicted of any crime. As a result of his efforts, Gerber lost his job as a post office clerk, his life savings, and found himself abandoned by his friends.[10]
  • Alfred Kinsey publishes Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948, allegedly the first scientific body of work that examined the subject of homosexuality. Mainstream publications started printing their opinions about this formerly taboo subject.[11][12]
  • Rev. Elder Troy Perry founded the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches in 1968 which served as a specific outreach to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender communities.[13]
  • Stonewall Riots of 1969 marked a turning point within the Civil Rights Era of the United States. New York City police raided the Stonewall Inn and for the first time the homosexual patrons fought back which started several days of rioting.[14] This bar had been operating illegally by bribing the police and was owned by the mafia. The riots occurred when the police finally came to shut down the illegal activities occurring at the site.
  • American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses in 1973.[15]
  • 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy as crafted by Gen. Colin Powell and approved by Pres. Clinton takes affect in 1993. This measure allows homosexuals to serve in the US military. Sexual orientation will not prohibit anyone from serving though they must not engage in homosexual conduct or openly say they are gay.[16]
  • Same-sex "marriage" became legal in Massachusetts on May 17, 2004 when homosexual couples were granted the same right as heterosexual couples. This right was preceded by years of legal wrangling in the state courts.[17]

Legal Success

Courts, including the Supreme Court, have accepted either one or both of these rationales. In Romer v. Evans, the Court found that discriminating against homosexuals could only be explained by a rational of animus laid bare, which was not enough even to allow state condemnation of homosexuality under the rational basis review test. Romer, then, protects the status of homosexuality from undue discrimination that occurs without a rational basis.[18]

Homosexual conduct was formerly illegal in many states.[19] In the last decade of the twentieth century, although these laws existed, they were rarely (if ever) enforced.[20] Without disclosing whether it saw homosexuality as a status protected from discrimination at as high of a level as gender and race, the Court struck down bans on homosexual conduct, framing it as an expansion of its privacy jurisprudence.[21]

The status of homosexuality before the law, then, is in some degree of flux. While bare discrimination against homosexual status is facially unconstitutional lacking a rational basis, and while preventing homosexual conduct is similarly unconstitutional, the Supreme Court has held in these landmark cases that the state may discriminate against homosexuals to preserve an "institution that the law protects" - namely, marriage.[22] As such, the standard to be applied in deciding if discrimination against homosexuals is wrong is somewhere in between rational basis review and strict scrutiny review. Justice Antonin Scalia thinks that this uncertainty will surely be resolved in the favor of gay rights, and he warns that such a legal erosion will result in the downfall of the law's moral authority.[23]

In 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston closed their adoption program after more than a century of finding homes for orphans and unwanted children when it was reported by the Boston Globe that homosexual couples had received children placed from the agency.[24] Massachusetts law, barring "orientation discrimination", prohibited one of the nations oldest adoption agencies from refusing service to homosexual activists, and a mass resignation of the agency's Board in protest followed.[25]

Opposition to Gay "Rights"

A poll reveals that a majority of US citizens[26] disapprove of homosexuality, or at least consider it less than ideal, and prefer that public policy does not encourage it. They also believe that accepting homosexuality would require the loss of rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, and traditional marriage.[27] Conservatives criticize attempts by homosexual rights activists to prohibit any statements which are critical of homosexuality, such as the idea that it is "unnatural" or "sinful", using hate crimes statutes and anti-discrimination laws. These laws violate the rights of those against homosexuality to continue trying to restrict the rights of homosexuals.

Conservatives also oppose attempts by homosexual activists to indoctrinate children by using liberal tactics such as tolerance or forcing diversity programs onto children in schools which strongly encourage the acceptance of homosexual behavior. Notable figures including Tony Perkins have expressed concerns. As any logical examination of the world would have one conclude, tolerance is an insidious construct which breeds relativism and lack of judgment.

  • The EU parliament called on Polish authorities to publicly condemn and take measures against declarations by officials "inciting discrimination and hatred based on sexual orientation."[28]

Support for Gay "Rights"

NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg (center) advocating for homosexual rights.

An April 2009 CNN poll showed the public evenly divided over the US military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, with 48% in favor and 47% opposed.[29] Polls consistently show that most people are opposed to same-sex marriage. Thirty states have had a public referendum on same-sex marriage, and all thirty have voted against it.


  • Kirk and Madsen, in their LGBTI Mein Kampf titled "After the Ball," predicted a mass public change of heart would follow, even among opponents, "if we can actually make them like us."[30]

Advocates routinely use deceit, notably pursuing various goal while pretending not to. For example, some advocates will claim:

  • The movement does not seek to convince others that homosexuality is right

Yet clearly the drive for "tolerance" is only one step toward the ultimate goal of "approval."

Blurring distinctions: Advocates routinely fail to distinguish between homosexual behavior and homosexuality as an "identity."

Presenting outstanding homosexuals as contributors to society

Turing was arrested in 1952 for homosexual acts and subsequently lost his security clearance. He was allowed to stay out of prison by agreeing to be injected with female hormones (which would supposedly decrease his sex drive). He later confided to a friend that the hormones caused him to grow breasts.[31] This may have contributed to his suicide by cyanide poisoning in 1954.[32] The British Government issued a formal, official apology for the way Alan Turing and other homosexuals were treated in the past.[33]

See also


  1. 1.0 1.1 Scott Lively. Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda, 47, 161. “We should not, however, discriminate against persons who define themselves as homosexuals. They should be free to label themselves as they choose, no less so than other groups whose beliefs or goals are disapproved by the majority. Indeed, we can compare homosexuals to their chief adversaries, the radical nationalists. Both groups hate each other, and would like to do away with the other. Neither side is embraced by the majority, but both deserve the right to freedom of their beliefs and to freedom of speech within reasonable limits. The rest of us must be willing to tolerate these difficult neighbors to preserve civility for society as a whole.” 
  2. Bernd Ladwig et al. (2012). "2.3 Anthropologie und Naturalismus", Menschenrechte: Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch (in German). J.B. Metzler, 220. ISBN 978-3476022714. “page indication is from Slovak 2017 translation” 
  3. Red Roots Of Gay Movement, Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media, September 10, 2003.
  4. In Partial Payment Class Struggle, Sexuality and Gay Liberation (1978), by A. Rausch. Retrieved from Urgent Tasks: Journal of the Revolutionary Left, Sojourner Truth Organization Digital Archive , 10 May 2007.
  5. John D'Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), quoted in Martin Meeker, Behind the Mask of Respectability, Journal of the History of Sexuality, (2001) 78-116.
  6. New Russian Evidence on the Korean War Biological Warfare Allegations: Background and Analysis, Milton Leitenberg, Cold War International History Project, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
  7. Object Lesson, TIME magazine, Dec. 25, 1950.
  8. Human Rights Campaign Mourns the Death of Gay Rights Pioneer Harry Hay, Press Release, Oct. 24, 2002.
  9. The Boston Phoenix, The real Harry Hay, Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002.
  10. "Gay History". gayhistory.com.
  11. "The Kinsey Institute - [Library & Special Collections]". indiana.edu.
  12. "The Kinsey Institute - [Library & Special Collections]". indiana.edu.
  13. http://www.mcccharleston.org/about/troyperry.htm
  14. "Stonewall 25: Cases 1-2". columbia.edu.
  15. http://archive.psych.org/edu/other_res/lib_archives/archives/197308.pdf
  16. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE5D81F30F933A15754C0A965958260
  17. http://www.hrc.org/issues/5489.htm
  18. Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620
  19. See generally Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186
  20. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, Justice Anthony Kennedy, in the Opinion of the Court, found this in his historical analysis.
  21. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558
  22. Lawrence v. Texas; Kennedy & O'Connor both reached this conclusion explicitly.
  23. Lawrence v. Texas, Scalia, J., dissenting.
  24. Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions, By Patricia Wen, The Boston Globe, March 11, 2006.
  25. Banned in Boston, by Maggie Gallagher, The Weekly Standard, 05/15/2006, Volume 011, Issue 33.
  26. Clinton, Obama Slow to Respond to Questions on Homosexuality Washington Post, March 18, 2007
  27. Traditional Values Coalition - values.org/modules.php?sid=2963 Homosexual "Marriage" In Canada Killing Free Speech
  28. [1]
  29. Polling Report http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
  30. How America Went Gay, by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., America, November 18, 1995.
  31. Oddballs and Eccentrics. Shaw, Karl. Edison, New Jersey: Castle Books, 2004
  32. "Alan Turing: the enigma". turing.org.uk.
  33. http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20571

External links