Homosexuality Is Not a Civil Right

Family Research Council ^ | Peter S3prigg

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

A Note on Sodomites in the Military: Remember that we should first and foremost oppose homosexuals being permitted to join the military because our Military is the best in the world and it remains one of the few institutions left in these United States that maintains excellence, standards, and is held up as an example for all. The Military is not for everyone; it is an exclusive organization by nature and those that volunteer for the organization must uphold high standards of conduct, impeccable character, decency and HONOR above all.

I implore everyone to fight these efforts by millionaire progressives and politicans to destroy the last institution they have failed to corrupt, and remember the very people seeking to implement this policy have nothing but disdain for our Armed Forces. Our soldiers, officers, and commanders must stand up to these politicans; thiese dissolute, degenerate people are the very antipathy of what it means to be a soldier...they put their selves ahead of anything else in their disgusting desire to make their perversion the center of everything and it defines them as a person. I would remind you that God Almighty condemned this sin in no uncertain terms and it would serve us well to remember the example of Sodom and Gomorrah. Our founding fathers considered it a crime against nature.

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

ping..

[central_va]

Dirt chute daredevils need not apply.

[Bean Counter]

Sorry, but a thread like this is useless without pictures.

[Melas]

I implore everyone to fight these efforts by millionaire progressives...

Not to stray off topic, but the above is representative of a disturbing trend I'm seeing more and more of on FR. What significance is the wealth of the progressive? Obviously some, or it wouldn't be mentioned. Why is it suddenly looked down upon in certain circles to be wealthy or have an Ivy League education? It used to be that only the left held the wealthy in disdain, and I prefer it that way.

[CharlesMartelsGhost]

[little jeremiah]

Thanks for the ping. I will alert the list shortly, gotta read it first (and do a couple of other things too).

[Retain Mike]

Advocates touting homosexuality as a civil right seek foundational scientific credibility in the 1973 decision by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removing it as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Removal followed a two year campaign Newsweek described as ongoing disruptive, chaotic attacks on psychiatrists and physiologists. Yet throughout these disruptive attacks, no academic papers arose at conferences refuting any research previously done.

Eventually onslaughts forced sufficient abstentions and apprehensive responses for a third of APA’s 17,000 plus membership to approve removal. The under-voting and public attacks support the understanding that the DSM is as likely to accumulate political manifestos and marketing brochures as attempted scientific expositions.

After this decision, activists targeted leading individual researchers such as Dr. David Reuben to ensure perpetual sanctity for the APA action. No research papers would again arise to confirm initial therapy success rates of 30% to 60 %, substantiating that 7 of 10 homosexuals could eventually walk away from the lifestyle. Persistent activism over 37 years enabled ubiquitous infiltration of academia ensuring pre-ordained theses, acceptable flexibility in research design definitions, suitable human data points, and enchanting statistical enhancement. The result has been social alchemy.

Psychology and Psychiatry chose to relinquish scientific rigor for popular societal and political acclaim. With studies concerning homosexuality freed from objective analysis, advocates can rely upon base antidotal politics to dominate debates.

[Misterioso]

This piece isn’t classified as “News.” Belongs in “Bloggers.”

[Outlaw Woman]

The emphasis is on their ‘progessive’ position not their wealth. That only stands as a reminder that they are using it to drive the country over a cliff and it is the millionaire (billionaire) progressives driving it:
Bill Gates
George Soros
Bloomberg
Jobs?
Buffet
The majority of dems sitting in congress. It’s the John Kerrys, the Nancy Peolosis, the Reids and on and on.

That’s just my interpretation and mho.

[Misterioso]

If the subject is Gay, anything is okay. You’ve been around here long enough to realize that; haven’t you?

[Misterioso]

. . . the Nancy Peolosis . . .

A rare gay affliction?

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

Well then, let me be the first to explain this to you in terms you can understand; we do not deplore wealth, nor do we harbvor envy for them, but more accurately the Elites or the "intellectual class" that have been commented on by conservative for a very long time. George Soros, and quite a few like him, are using vast sums of wealth to promote progressive/socialist agendas that I opposwe...and under their plan I suppose they'll be the privileged class and we'll be the serfs.

I believe that David Horowitz has shown that the Ivy League is more interested in political indoctrination than it is in excellence or education. For crying out loud, Paul Krugman taught at Princeton...he's a marxist that amazingly believes Obama didn't spend enough....Barack Obama has given us historical deficits and spent massive amounts...and the economy is still in the gutter.

[scott7278]

In total agreement - great post!

[Outlaw Woman]

lol...does look like a terminal disease doesn’t it? Well that spelling suits her. There I coined a new term: Peolosis = democrat dementia Incurable as far as we know

[DJ MacWoW]

This is what it's about.

Mass.Governor getting money from millionaire homosexual political activist Tim Gill

[Chode]

delenda est...

[Trailerpark Badass]

What significance is the wealth of the progressive?

Are you serious?

[little jeremiah]

The Family Research Council is not a blog. It’s a regular website.

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

Great information...that’s the point I make all the time...they removed it from the DSM for political reasons. Dr. Fittzgibbons has a lot of good research. This is a big issue and we have to stay on top mof it no matter what the naysayers think...because this issue is going the same way abortion is...eventually the court is going to legislate homosexual marriage.