| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | {{Homosexuality}} | | {{Homosexuality}} |
| − | The '''Homosexual Agenda''', or [[Homosexuality|homosexual]] ideology, consists of a set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate acceptance and approval of homosexuality, and the strategies used to implement such. This article notes that the goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting Biblical teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s). Such special rights will necessarily come [[zero-sum game|at the expense]] of the rights of broader society. | + | The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a neoconservative conspiracy theory popularized by the neoconservative news network, Fox News. It is a supposed plot of homosexuals to gain special rights, and restrict our freedoms through the stricter enforcement of hate crimes and such. |
| − | | |
| − | Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish.
| |
| | | | |
| | Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). | | Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). |
| | | | |
| − | == The Homosexual Agenda == | + | == The Homosexual Agenda Conspiracy== |
| | | | |
| | Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement, | | Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement, |
| | | | |
| − | :has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this. | + | :has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do in the bed, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this. |
| | | | |
| | In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed, | | In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed, |
| Line 20: |
Line 18: |
| | :What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref> | | :What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to promote the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after gay marriage was imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, Who's in a Family?, which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref> | + | A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to promote the lifestyle in [[public schools]] through indoctrination. This occurred quickly and intensely after gay marriage was imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, Who's in a Family?, which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref> |
| | | | |
| | In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News and World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum. | | In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News and World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum. |
| Line 51: |
Line 49: |
| | == Specific goals == | | == Specific goals == |
| | | | |
| − | The goals of the homosexual movement include: | + | The goals of the supposed homosexual agenda include: |
| | | | |
| | #Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religously based laws. | | #Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religously based laws. |
| − | #*Reminding the world that marraige is a legal term and standing the in US, not a spiritual one as believed by Christians. | + | #*Reminding the world that marraige is a legal term and standing the in US, not a spiritual one as believed by most abrahamic monotheists. |
| | #*Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]]because their first ammendment rights allow them to. | | #*Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]]because their first ammendment rights allow them to. |
| | #Remind conservatives that there cannot be a gay gene, just like like there cannot be a "Black Gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes. | | #Remind conservatives that there cannot be a gay gene, just like like there cannot be a "Black Gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes. |
| Line 126: |
Line 124: |
| | [Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 Homosexuality, by F. Earle Fox, David W. Virtue, p. 12]</ref> | | [Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 Homosexuality, by F. Earle Fox, David W. Virtue, p. 12]</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | == Opposing Christian Agenda == | + | == Opposing the Fundamentalist Christian Agenda == |
| | | | |
| − | Liberals are critical of Christian groups that oppose homosexuality. These criticisms include Christian activities of: | + | Liberals and Leftists are critical of Christian groups that oppose homosexuality. These criticisms include Christian activities of: |
| | | | |
| | *Threatening to shut all the soup kitchens in New York if they cannot exclude homosexuals from employment <ref> [http://chicago.gopride.com/news/article.cfm/ArticleID/1824489]Salvation Army Uses Homeless To Fight Gay Benefits <ref/> | | *Threatening to shut all the soup kitchens in New York if they cannot exclude homosexuals from employment <ref> [http://chicago.gopride.com/news/article.cfm/ArticleID/1824489]Salvation Army Uses Homeless To Fight Gay Benefits <ref/> |
| Line 135: |
Line 133: |
| | *Influencing local media in what stories they produce | | *Influencing local media in what stories they produce |
| | *Lobbying local, state and federal government officials to vote in the desired way on pending legislation<ref>[http://www.cwfa.org/about.asp Concerned Women For America] About page</ref> | | *Lobbying local, state and federal government officials to vote in the desired way on pending legislation<ref>[http://www.cwfa.org/about.asp Concerned Women For America] About page</ref> |
| − | *Calling anyone who supports gay rights a 'sinner' or other untrue insults.
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda == | + | ==Opponents of the supposed Homosexual Agenda == |
| | Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]]. | | Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]]. |
| | | | |