Homosexual Agenda
The homosexual agenda, or homosexual ideology, consists of a set of beliefs and objectives. The ideology and goals, as explained further below, include indoctrinating students in public school, restricting free speech, obtaining special treatment, distorting science, and interfering with freedom of association. Like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda threatens basic freedoms, including the First Amendment.[1]
It is an agenda that gay rights activists set in the late 1980s, in a book called After the Ball, where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame:
- "The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." [2]
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion).
Contents
The Homosexual Agenda
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 kindergarteners, as recounted by the decision of Parker v. Hurley.[3]
Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:[2][4]
- "Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible."
- "Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
- "Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
- "Make gays look good."
- "Make the victimizers look bad."
- "Get funds from corporate America."
United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:
| “ | Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.[5] | ” |
Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.
The Goals
The goals of the homosexual movement include:
- destroying Christian morals
- censoring biblical condemnations of homosexuality and evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax[6] [7]
- establishing affirmative action for homosexuals[8]
- expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation[9]
- ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality[10]
- corrupt Christian youth
- promote homosexuality in schools[11]
- in places like Massachusetts and California — where the gay lobby is the strongest — it starts as early as pre-school. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys — "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual." Or — "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Well, at that age, all members of the opposite sex "have cooties."
- You're planting a seed that can totally mess up the normal development process later, when at 12 or 14, kids enter the age of sexual confusion and discovering the opposite sex. [12]
- promote science that legitimizes homosexuality, such as claims of a never-identified gay gene[13]
- force businesses to accommodate their lifestyle
- Suing an online dating website for discrimination
- getting more rights in prison
- Gay and Lesbian Prisoners in California Allowed Conjugal Visits [14]
- Legalization of recreational or "party" drugs
- Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality
The state-by-state push for same-sex marriage can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.[15]
- New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal [16]
Psychological Tactics
The charge of "Homophobia" has been increasingly evidenced as being a means of psychological intimidation and mind control used in promoting the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by such, or of being a bigot persecuting actual victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it. In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.[17]
While not all homosexuals agree with such tactics, it has been promoted by leading homosexual activists. In what is widely regarded as the handbook for the “gay agenda," Harvard trained marketing experts and social scientists Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) and Hunter Madsen advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims, while making those who opposed them as evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted “jamming,” in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the “gay” agenda are publicly smeared. “In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector ... The purpose of victim imagery is to make straights feel very uncomfortable,” they suggested.
“Jam homo-hatred (i.e., disagreement with homosexual behaviors) by linking it to Nazi horror,” was the strategy of Kirk and Madsen. “Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of ‘Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered,’ ‘hysterical backwoods preachers,’ ‘menacing punks,’ and a ‘tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.’" Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."[18]
What is seen by some as Kirk and Madsen’s most revealing admission is their statement, “[O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof.” "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"[19]
Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 48. The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.
Author Robert Bauman additionally records, “It makes no difference that the ads are lies . . . because we’re using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones.” [20]
Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, “The Gay Agenda” stated, “Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law.”
Erik Holland, author of "The Nature of Homosexuality," perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others homophobic that "anyone who questions their labeling someone a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro homosexual author Vernon A Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."[21]
It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term homophobia is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use it, in which they actually imagine that those who oppose them are fearful of them, or are secretly attracted to them.
Opposing Christian Agenda
Liberals are critical of Christian groups that oppose homosexuality. These criticisms include Christian activities of:
- Soliciting donations
- Encouraging email activism
- Producing and disseminating gay reform information
- Influencing local media in what stories they produce
- Lobbying local, state and federal government officials to vote in the desired way on pending legislation[22]
Opponents of the 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.
References
- ↑ Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban The Independent
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 After the Ball (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda Citizenlink
- ↑ 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."
- ↑ Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) The Overhauling of Straight America Available at STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"
- ↑ LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS at findlaw.com
- ↑ White, Hilary (04-21-2006) Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt LifeSiteNews.com
- ↑ Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos. Mass Resistance
- ↑ The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) A Box of Their Own? (opinion) The Crimson
- ↑ Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue" From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
- ↑ Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); Able v. United States, 155 F.3d 628(2d Cir. 1998) (military)
- ↑ Morrison v. Board of Education
- ↑ http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm
- ↑ http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS00D2
- ↑ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,277137,00.html
- ↑ Lewis v. Harris
- ↑ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/
- ↑ [Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]
- ↑ http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm
- ↑ After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)
- ↑ The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.
- ↑ http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage
- ↑ Concerned Women For America About page
Further reading
- Homosexuality and the Nazi Party by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
- 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda, Baptist Press
