There is a gay agenda, namely to make “gay” behavior acceptable. There is a case to be made that this is harmful, and David Kupelian makes the case, in his book The Marketing of Evil. David Kupelian is religious, and I am not, but his case has some merit even if you are a complete atheist.
Consider the following quote:
“Until all woman are lesbians, there will be no true political revolution.” — (Feminist author and journalist Jill Johnston.)
We might wonder why a feminist would want this outcome. Perhaps an explanation comes from the following quote:
“We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.” (–Feminist author Robin Morgan, who became an editor at Ms. magazine.)
Here is what Kupelian says:
“First, let’s be very clear about what we’re looking at–pure rage, and all-consuming hatred of men, and often a hatred of God also. If you think I’m exaggerating, read the writings of these people for yourself. You will be shocked at the depth and intensity of their anger..Indeed, in some well known cases, feminist leaders report having been sexually abused as children or beaten by a violent husband. Apparently, they have concluded in their blind anger that all men are predatory beasts and molesters, and thus are determined to save their fellow women from the “slavery” and “oppression” of family life.
The Catholic Church had a major sex scandal, usually identified by the ubiquitous news tag “Pedophile Priests”. Kupelian notes that this tag is not completely accurate, it was more accurate to identify the priests as homosexuals who assaulted teenage boys. And he says there is hypocrisy here, because the same media that exposed this issue, gave sympathetic coverage to critics of the American Boy Scouts who criticized them for not wanting to have homosexuals in charge of their boys.
He adds that at least fifty United Way chapters have ceased to fund the Boy Scouts, some local governments and school districts have declared it to be discriminatory, and the American Civil Liberties Union attacks it endlessly.
Kupelian notes that historically “the Boy Scouts of America has had its own problem with sexual offenses committed by adult leaders against Scouts.” and that they understand that “adults interested in sexual contact with young people gravitate toward careers…allowing proximity to their prey–positions such as coaches, teachers, scoutmasters and priests.”
Kupelian:” “So the big question: Why does the mainstream press condemn the Catholic Church for allowing predatory homosexuals to destroy the lives of boys, while simultaneously condemning the Boy Scouts of America for trying to avoid precisely the same thing in their organization?”
It does seem odd to me that any honest person would attack the Boy Scouts on this basis. (Though a news item has just come in saying that not only was there a lot of sexual abuse in the Boy Scouts, but there were cover-ups of that abuse. see ‘sources’ below, Los Angeles Times, October 19, 2012.)
Masha Gessen is a lesbian, and was a New York Times blogger until Obama appointed her to run Radio Liberty in Russia. This is her agenda:
It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. … (F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.
I’ve included a link to the video where she says this (see below), and she tells about her own life and multiple partners and children, and my reaction is that its good that she does not lie, but why destroy marriage for us just because her own life didn’t follow a traditional trajectory?
Consider this (not in the Kupelian book)
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education sent out a fundraising e-mail about a case it had taken a couple of years ago at Missouri State University. The letter itself sums it up best:
Emily’s troubles began in her freshman year when a class assignment required that she display homosexual behavior and write a reflection paper on that experience. Emily chose not to participate in the behavior but to nevertheless write the paper as if she had—itself a compromise of her beliefs.
Homosexuals naturally want their behavior to be accepted, but some of them, and their sympathizers, get simply too aggressive in pushing that acceptance.
For instance, in some states, like California, homosexual proselytizing is mandated by law, starting in the earliest grades. One would think that little children could be spared sexuality discussions period. Let them be children.
Is homosexuality genetic? Yes – twin studies say there is a 50% contribution by genes. Nobody has identified those genes though. I do know one woman who had boyfriends, then had a bad experience with one of them, then took up with a female lover for the next couple of decades. I also have a distant female relative who married, raised a family, divorced, and then took up with a female lover. It would seem in the latter cases that there is some choice involved. In fact, there is always choice involved, you can have feelings, but you do not have to follow where those feelings lead. By being exposed to the wrong chemical in the womb – you can become “gay”, for instance DES was prescribed to women for a while, and it increased the likelihood of homosexuality in the daughters of woman given the drug. And that is just one example. But the question to me is: if a simple chemical can have such a big effect on your sexual orientation, should you let your sexual orientation define you? And should you do what “feels good”? And should you proselytize for gays as if they are just another civil rights issue? And then the fact is, gay behavior leads to situations that heterosexual behavior does not:
Kupelian tells the tale of Robert Baumann, who despite having a family and being a conservative congressman from Maryland, was caught having a rendezvous with a male prostitute. Bauman wrote that at a young age:
This was a frightening force from deep within my being, an involuntary reaction to the sight, smell, and feel of other boys. I neither understood nor accepted it. And I came to hate myself because of this…horrible weakness.
Bauman also wrote
How could any normal and moral human being do what I did? How could anyone, however callous, repeatedly be unfaithful to one’s spouse…In many ways I was driven by a force over which I seemed to have little control…I seemed willing to risk my marriage, my wife and children, even life itself”
After being caught with the prostitute, Bauman lost his family.
Gay behavior isn’t exactly consensual behavior between 2 adults. A widely cited 1978 study by Alan Bell and Martin Wineburg reported that 43 percent of homosexuals had more than five hundred sex partners during their lifetime. That is a recipe for a large spreading of sexual disease. One could also ask, if all men, whether gay or not, had 500 partners, what sort of society would we have?
One thing that peeves me, as a blogger on evil, is people who lie for an agenda. For instance, gay activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen advocated lying, in the book where they outlined the public relations plan they had been advocating for fellow gays for years. After The Ball became the public relations bible of the gay rights movement. One part that bothers me is their assertion that “It makes no difference that the ads are lies, not to us, 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.”
I would argue that if they (or advocates of any agenda) want our trust, they have to be honest with us. A society of liars cannot last. You can always have, what seems to you, a great excuse to lie. For instance, in another part of Kupelian’s book, he quotes Palestinian journalist Sami El Soudi who said that “almost all Palestinian (movie) directors (fake horrible battle scenes with the Israelis, using) all possible means, including trickery and fabulation, to fight against the tanks and airplanes the enemy has and we don’t…when a scene was well done the onlookers laughed and applauded.”
Whatever your agenda is, be honest with us.
Journalists may also rationalize biased behavior. Gay journalist Ramon Escobar (a MSNBC producer) said “This whole issue of ‘balance’ that we as journalists are supposed to achieve…When we cover the black community, I’ve never seen a newsroom where you’re covering one side and then you have to go run out and get the Klan’s point of view.” He said this at the “National Lesbian and Gay Journalist’s Association” conference of Sept 7-10, 2000.
This is a bad argument. If, for example, you are covering the issue of homosexuals as scout leaders in the Boy Scouts, you should get the opinion of the folks who run the Boy Scouts, even if they criticize “gays” for their behavior. To do otherwise is to be dishonest with the public.
Kirk and Madsen advocated “desensitization” (namely “to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome.”) and they also advocated that negative images be associated with their opponents such as “Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered or castrated,” “hysterical backwoods preachers, drooling with hate,” Nazis, etc.
Then there is the “hate crimes” issue. There are now laws that say if you were assaulted, the perpetrator would get one sentence, but if you were assaulted because of your homosexuality, the perpetrator would receive a more severe sentence. Is this really fair?
We have to be aware of the agendas of some people, which may make no sense to us.
Kupelian says that:
In 1948, Indiana University zoologist Alfred Kinsey released the book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. This was supposedly a dispassionate scientific study of American male sex habits, and it had a lot of influence. More than five decades later, he is still referred to as the “father of the sexual revolution.” Indiana University portrayed Kinsey as a conservative Republican and family man, and the press believed it. In reality, he was sadistic and a bi/homosexual, among other things.
In 1997, a biographer of Kinsey, James Jones, revealed: “The man I came to know bore no resemblance to the canonical Kinsey…he approached his work with missionary fervor…He wanted to undermine traditional morality, to soften the rules of restraint…”
People like this exist, from Jill Johnston (quoted at the opening of this post) to Alfred Kinsey. All sorts of agendas that don’t make sense to most of us, do exist.
Some gays claimed that we are all gay, and though I don’t believe that, I do speculate that whatever mechanisms attract a man to a woman, or vice versa, might co-exist in the same brain, but one might be inhibited or dormant or inactive. The fact is, that we don’t know how these drives work at all. Interestingly, people who look at homosexuality as a sin, are usually also assuming its a choice, not a biological force, and ironically, some homosexuals threatened a researcher (Dr. D. F. Swaab) with death for suggesting it was biologically based.
1. (book) “Coming Apart” by Charles Murray
2. (book) The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian
2. (book) The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a Gay Conservative
4. The interview with Masha Gessen is at http://youtu.be/n9M0xcs2Vw4 its worth looking at for the reality of the above quotes to sink in.
5. A warning from Canada from a teacher, and professor who tells about mandated gay curriculum in Canada — http://youtu.be/xe_ultkeNPk (a little boy comes home from school and says “today I married my best friend Jimmy”)
6. One book I did NOT use but which looks relevant is: A Queer Thing Happened To America by Michael L. Brown about which one reviewer said: “All in all, this book is a devastating rebuttal of the homosexualist agenda. . . . It is one long volume allowing the other side to speak for itself, condemning itself in the process.”
7. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-scouts-oregon-20121019,0,5468251.story?track=rss – (on new scandal of sex abuse in the boy scouts.)