Skip to comments.Book Review of The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing The Principal Threat To Religious Freedom Today
Posted on 06/13/2004 5:21:31 PM PDT by az4vlad
Review by Sandra Alexander
This book reveals where the homosexual movement is taking us, with its "six stages" agenda and attacks on Christian values. We have now entered the fourth stage, where homosexuals are silencing opposing views everywhere.
In the Introduction to their book, The Homosexual Agenda, Mr. Sears and Mr. Osten ask the question, How far down the road have homosexual activists taken us toward their goal of unbridled sexual behavior and silencing of the church? (p. 14) They then describe the four stages which lead to the moral demise of a culture, stating that the homosexuals, after quickly passing through the first two stages, are now finishing the third stage, (The Mobilization Stage) developing a common language and strategy for presenting their case to the public.
They [homosexual advocates] reframed the issue, taking it out of the moral realm, and presented it as a human rights issue. Those who opposed their argument were deemed hateful or intolerant toward those that are different - even though the groups only identification is that of a chosen sexual behavior. (p. 14) This strategy is working, because once an issue has been redefined from a moral absolute to an individual choice, society starts to be reprogrammed that the arguments of the group are valid and therefore special privileges for previous injustices and for the affirmation of the behavior occur. This is stage four, The Legitimization Stage. (p. 14) The authors warn us that we have now reached stage four and they ask the question, How has one to two percent of the population achieved so much success in transforming American culture and restricting religious freedom? (p. 17)
Part of the answer to the question is found in two publications (1987 and 1989) by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. Their strategy to change Americas perception of homosexual behavior included the following six points:
1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible. (Through sheer perseverance the opposition will be worn down) 2. Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers. 3. Give homosexual protectors a just cause. 4. Make gays look good. (Notice that the media always makes the gay character the hero) 5. Make the victimizers look bad. 6. Solicit funds: the buck stops here (i.e., get corporate America and major foundations to financially support the homosexual cause). (p. 18)
Kirk and Madsen knew that Bible-believing Christians would be the major opponents of legitimizing homosexuality because of their belief in the Biblical teaching that homosexuality is unnatural and vile. To counteract this, they stated, We can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology. Against the mighty pull of institutional religion, one must set the mightier draw of science and public opinion .Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion. (p. 20) In addition to this Kirk and Madsen wrote, We intend to make the antigays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types. (p. 23)
Homosexuals have made deep inroads into corporate America. In the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) training manual, activists are advised, Before attempting to get domestic partner benefits from your employer, it is imperative that the companys nondiscrimination policy include sexual orientation .. (p. 153) The strategy has worked well. the addition of sexual orientation to company antidiscrimination policies is the Trojan horse that leads to domestic-partner benefits (p. 153) Mr. Sears and Mr. Osten report that 31 percent of Fortune 500 companies now offer domestic-partner benefits, including 82 percent of the Fortune 50. (p. 151)
It is well-documented that homosexuals as a group have a much higher level of disposable income than most families. (p. 156) Therefore, corporations are lining up to get their share of the homosexual dollars. Subaru, for example, proudly states that it is the number one choice of lesbian households. (p. 159) United Airlines, under pressure, in 2000 forged a new three-year partnership with the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund. Benefits of this partnership included underwriting of all staff air travel for Lambda for the next three years. (p. 160) The authors ask the question, Can you imagine the uproar in the media and from radical homosexual activists if, for example, Delta Airlines gave three years of (benefits) to the first Baptist Church to facilitate their opposition of Lambda? (p. 160)
But monetary benefits are not the only goal of the homosexuals. Through diversity training sessions for employees in many corporations and government entities, biblical beliefs on homosexual behavior and marriage are openly ridiculed. (p. 156) The radical homosexual agenda is definitely not about tolerance; it is about acceptance and an in-your-face desire to flaunt homosexuals sexuality and related behavior at the expense of others. (p. 156)
Another target of the homosexuals is the public schools. According to the National Education Association and its allies, children must be taught that sexual orientation is fluid (which is an interesting contradiction since homosexual activists are intent on proving a genetic link to their behavior), that only intolerant religions do not affirm homosexual behavior, and that once you are entrapped in homosexual behavior, there is no escape. No dissenting views are permitted. Thus, the gospel is silenced, parental values are undermined, and an impressionable child is doomed to engage in behavior that will often result in his or her eventual self-destruction. (p. 51) As Newsweek writer, David Gelman, puts it, At high schools around the country, multiculturalism has begun to embrace multisexualism more students seem to be coming out, and theyre coming out younger. (p. 50)
The indoctrination that takes place in our public schools has definitely had an effect in shaping teens attitudes toward homosexual behavior. In 2001, Zogby International released a poll that found that 85 percent of high school seniors thought homosexual men and lesbians should be accepted by society .two-thirds thought same-sex marriage should be allowed. Even 80 percent of evangelical Christian students supported hate-crimes legislation, which in its many proposed forms, will be used to silence religious speech about homosexual behavior. (p. 67)
Universities are now actively recruiting homosexuals, in some cases tailoring their student housing policies to support homosexual behavior and preferences. (p. 76) At the same time, Steve Hayner, former president of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship reports, We have had more challenges to our basic right to exist on campus settings during the past two years than in the previous fifty-five combined. Its not just usthis is hitting Catholics and Muslims and others. What we are seeing is a growing challenge to religious free speech. (p. 72) While people of faith find themselves forced to put up with behavior that offends them, those who practice homosexual behavior are catered to, at the expense of everyone else. (p. 77)
Lately homosexual behavior on college campuses is taking a dangerous new turn - the promotion of sexual relations between adults and children, known as pedophilia. (p. 83) U.S. News and World Report columnist John Leo noted that he had "seen a trend toward the promotion of pedophilia among academics as early as 1981. (p. 85) Professor Harris Mirkin of the University of Missouri-Kansas City published a study (funded with taxpayer money) that compared the moral panic about pedophilia to previous panics about feminism and homosexuality. Sheldon Steinbach of the American Council on Education adds his comment, Todays heresy often becomes tomorrows orthodoxy. (p. 85) This statement is extremely chilling but also very true. Just as homosexual behavior has now become accepted orthodoxy on many university campuses and Christians and Orthodox Jews have become the heretics, we are going down the same road with pedophilia. As the homosexual agenda continues to sexualize our culture, other once-forbidden behaviors are exalted as just more alternative lifestyles. The result is that the well-being of millions of children is at risk, along with the right of parents to protect their children from sexual exploitation. (p. 86)
The authors begin their chapter entitled The Family under Attack with a quote from Stanley Kurtz, writing in National Review. He predicts, in part, that As soon as even a single state legalizes same-sex marriage, the nation will be plunged into a furious legal, political, and cultural struggle As legal and political battles over traveling couples spread from state-to-state, the chaos will multiply and the courts, already inclined to mandate same-sex marriage, will grow increasingly receptive to arguments that the Full Faith and Credit Clause demands national gay marriage. And the even stronger arguments for nationally mandated gay marriage under the Constitutions equal-protection clause will also find favor in the courts. (p. 89) Once marriage is redefined for same-sex partners, it opens the Pandoras box to be redefined for any assortment of individuals. After all, if two men or two women have the right to be married, why not two men and three women, or two men, one woman, and a dog and a chimpanzee? (p. 94) The authors point out that granting marital rights to same-sex and other partnerships will quickly change the traditional view of marriage in which monogamy and fidelity to your spouse are valued. In a study conducted by UVM psychologists Rothbaum and Solomon, they found the following: While 79 percent of married heterosexuals felt that nonmonogamy was wrong, only 34 percent of homosexual men not in civil unions and 50 percent in civil unions thought it was wrong to engage in nonmonogamous sexual behavior. (p. 95) Openly homosexual author Andrew Sullivan writes that homosexuals have a need for extramarital outlets and therefore same-sex marriage will make adultery more acceptable for all married couples. (p. 95)
With such a threat washing over American society and particularly challenging the religious freedom of the Christian church, how is the church responding? Mr. Sears and Mr. Osten cites examples of churches who have attempted to remain true to the teaching of the Bible. In early December 1989, members of the militant homosexual group ACT-UP disrupted the service in New York Citys St. Patricks Cathedral, yelling and chaining themselves to pews. One irate individual made his way to the altar for Communion, took a wafer, and threw it on the ground. (p. 117) At First Presbyterian Church of Orlando, Florida, the Rev. Howard Edington was forced to retire under pressure from some members of his congregation and the Central Florida Presbytery because of his vocal opposition to the ordination of homosexual pastors, same-sex marriage, and preaching a sermon against the citys sexual orientation anti-discrimination policy. (p. 122) These examples are just a microcosm of the war that radical homosexual activists have staged against the church. It has been a war in which the church has either totally capitulated on the issue and embraced homosexual behavior while rejecting biblical teaching, or found herself under increasing attack from inside and outside the sanctuary for taking a biblical stand on the issue. (p. 118)
One of the most insidious attacks on religious freedom has come under the guise of so-called hate crimes legislation. (p. 202) In municipalities with an assortment of hate crime laws or similar speech limiting laws, religious freedom is already at peril. In 1998, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors took the unusual action of denouncing an advertising campaign sponsored by a national ministry that said homosexual behavior was sinful and that homosexuals can change. Although the ministry took the board to court over the matter, the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected the claim, stating, The main purpose and effect of the Supervisors actions was to promote equality and condemn hate crimes, not to attack or inhibit religious beliefs. Yet that is exactly what the resolutions did. (p. 203)
The authors state, Many Christians are unaware of the threats posed to their religious freedoms. Because of this, either because of ignorance or laziness, sadly, many Christians will come to realize the famous lament of the German pastor, Martin Niemoeller, is true for them as well: First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I am not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I am not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I am not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me. (p. 204) This book is an excellent read if you want to see clearly the chilling path where the homosexual movement is really taking us.
A note from the Authors: "While this book deals with a difficult and contentious issue, we want to state up front that both authors and the ministry of the Alliance Defense Fund have nothing but respect, compassion, and sensitivity toward those ensnared in homosexual behavior. Both of us have family members, respected acquaintances, and friends who have been trapped in this behavior and know something of the incredible pain and sorrow it has brought to them and their families. With God's grace we carefully balance this love and respect for these individuals with warnings about the carrying out, promotion, and demand for legal approval for homosexual behavior that will stifle religious freedom and trap millions of more people in its deadly grip." (p. viii)
Presents an article about the "historical debate which culminated in the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the psychiatric manual."
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
The Three Myths About Homosexuality
One quote from "Myths" which is frightening:
"A 1992 study in Pediatrics found that 25.9% of 12-year-olds are uncertain if they are gay or straight. The teen years are critical to the question of self-labeling, so the facts must be presented in our schools in a fair and balanced manner. "
Mentally defaulting on the perpetuation of self is a dirt-road cul-de-sac.
I know quite a few gay people, some are family members of mine, and NONE of them has a gay agenda. They live quietly and never even mention being gay. They don't go to protests, they don't hold hands or kiss in public. I think the quiet law abiding ones are the majority. They certainly are in the cases of the ones I know well. They keep to themselves. They have no desire to mess with religious freedom or even marriage. They only ask to be left alone.
Must be like all the good Muslims. Funny how you rarely hear them speak out against the jihadis.
It's actually a bad analogy and I won't use it anymore, because I'm sure there ARE good, decent Muslims who just want to worship God in their traditional way and don't want to force Islam on everyone else.
The problem with your statement:
You're extrapolating the few people you personally know and then making a generalization from that. In order to find out if your generalization is right, you need to read and study about the "gay" agenda. Have you? There's more information on FR in one place than just about anywhere else on the 'net.
If you had studied (without prior bias) you would see that there is, indeed, a radical "gay" agenda.
In fact, the evidence is voluminous that there is indeed a radical homosexual plan - as evidenced in "After the Ball" - written in the late 80s by a two homosexuals - the influence society to suit them.
If you don't want to inform youself, you're welcome to stay ill-informed. But your opinion will reveal you to be the homosexual supporter that I am afraid you are.
Have you ever read any articles or books by Tammy Bruce? If you haven't, do FR search. She's a homosexual who admits the existence of the "gay" agenda and decries it, for the very reasons I do.
Homosexual Agenda Ping - Just bookmarked this; don't have time to read it at the moment. Looks very very good. I'm going to have to get this book.
OK, we need to get it straightened out - is there a radical "gay" agenda or not? If anyone spends some time reading the Categorical Index of articles on homosexuality that Scripter has organized and EdReform puts up links to, they will know the answer.
If anyone wants on/off this pinglist, pingify me!
Public Service Announcement:
http://www.mikegabbard.com/ - a REAL conservative running for US Congress in Hawaii. He could be a real force for conservative values if he wins. He also is very good at working with others without compromising or losing his cool. A rare character.
I'm sure there are good, decent people of all religions who just want to workship God in their traditional way and don't want to force their religion on everyone else, but do you suppose the gays think there is a radical religious agenda of suppression and exclusion?
It is clear to anyone who has read much of the info here on FR (or where it was originally sourced) that the homosexual agenda pushers - whether they be practitioners or merely their supporters - want to dismbowel religion or change the nature of the message.
Homosexual activists have clearly stated themselves that they want to dismantle the moral foundation of society and change the very meaning of marriage, family, and what is acceptable in sexual behavior. They have stated that they want to change children's minds about sexual orientation from kindergarten and are actively pursuing that goal now, with "gay" friendly cirrcula, clubs, special classes, teaching seminars and so on.
Now what was your question?
An important point about the "gay agenda" is that early in the homosexual movement, circa 1970, activists were already promoting what has proved to be their most powerful weapon: "coming out of the closet". The logic is inescapable -- by being willing to publicly declare their sexual "orientation", they could convince themselves if not other people that it is not a shameful thing to be homosexual. But the real effectiveness of this strategy is that it made people think of homosexuals, not as a furtive, mentally disturbed category of people, but instead as their neighbors, friends and relatives. Research shows that people who are personally acquainted with homosexuals or lesbians are more likely to be personally tolerant or accepting of homosexuals and lesbians, and more likely to support same-sex marriage and other legal or political goals of homosexual activists.
"...do you suppose the gays think there is a radical religious agenda of suppression and exclusion?"
If homosexuals think that there is a radical religious agenda of suppression and exclusion, that is evidence that they are seriously incapable of rational thought, know nothing of history, don't understand hygiene, the spread of illness, the inherent dangers of same sex sodomy and promiscuity, and are focused solely on their sexual proclivities to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.
If someone actually thinks that, he or she is actually very mentally ill. To have as the entire focus of one's life the method whereby one achieves orgasm (and a very nasty way at that) and to view everything in the world through the lens of that method of achieving orgasm, is utterly selfish, miserable, and by its very nature, the narrowest and most exclusionist of viewpoints.
Darned but you are right about that. Drinks were colder, lasted longer and calories/carbs and sugar didn't matter. Cruising the hamburger joints and going to "record hops" was all we cared about. I wish our children and grandchildren had gotten the same kind of kinder gentler world. Bum deal for them and for us!
|What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda|
|Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)|
|Culture of Vice|
|The Stamp of Normality|
While my experience with homosexuals is similar to yours, this does not invalidate the work of the authors of the book.
If you think that their work is flawed, you have to prove it--and given their definitions of the terms, it looks a lot like they are correct.
Gays may think that because the truth is at odds with sin. Anytime someone immersed in a particular vice hears the truth they think it is hate. Truth is hate, to those who hate the truth.
<< Must be like all the good Muslims. Funny how you rarely hear them speak out against the jihadis.
It's actually a bad analogy and I won't use it anymore .... >>
No it is not, it is the perfect analogy.
And that's too bad because it fits like a glove.
My sodomist friends, those, that is, who having so far lucked out in the permitting someone to give them HIV/AIDS crapshoot -- and are still alive -- are also sitting out the terroristic Sodonazi assault on our nation -- and on our Civilization -- just as are the several hundred million Islamonazis with whom they are effectively very very very closely allied.
And bear in mind that much much much more evil is allowed, facilitated, enabled and effected by those who do nothing but sit and wait than could be perpetrated in ten lifetimes apiece by Human History's Hitlers, Hirohitos, Hillary KKKli'toons, Ho Chi Mins, J F'in' Kohnkerrys, Pol Pots, Mao Tze Tungs, Marxs, Lenins and Joe Stalins.
In the fight to the finish for our very survival in which both our Nation and our Civilization are presently engaged there are no shades of gray and they are either with US -- or they ARE the enemy.
<< Research shows that people who are .... [Blah blah blah ... ] >>
Published by whom?
Where may I peruse the data and the results?
Sorry if I annoyed you!
Anyway, my memory being porous at best, I scrounged around on Google. Here's what I came up with: The Henry J. Kaiser Foundation conducted a telephone survey of a randomly selected, nationally representative group of 2,283 adults in the US. They found that 47% of the adults in the survey who knew homosexuals believed that homosexuality is wrong, but 68% of adults who did not know any homosexuals believed that homosexuality is wrong. They claim an error of +- 3.5%. (http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/3193-index.cfm)
This foundation seems to specialize in surveys and research on health care issues. They conduct lots of polls, they seem to have serious money (these kinds of surveys are expensive). They appear to be liberal.
But the results of the poll are plausible from my own experience. I recently saw the attitudes of my own parents and brothers soften about homosexuality when a cousin of ours in New York disclosed her lesbianism to us. They're still opposed to homosexuality -- as am I -- but the seem to be accepting of her on a personal level. I must say, I am also accepting of her, even though I am cognizant of the huge risks and miseries implicit in the homosexual lifestyle. Hate the sin and love the sinner, I suppose.
Answer: A large majority do, but there are a few quasi-sane ones who don't. When I was still lost in my homosexuality, I was reading a lot of homosexual literature, especially the so-called "gay Christian" (Google it and see) stuff. I noticed that nearly every one of the resources took potshots at "fundies" and the "religious right," so much so that I know a former conservative who went to those sites and now thinks that we're modern-day Pharisees. My second former boyfriend, who still is a proclaimed conservative, has grown an irrational hatred for all believers who think that homosexuality is a sin. That's how "infective" the resources are.
Yes, there are a few homosexuals out there who just want to be left alone, but they are vastly overwhelmed by the radicals. It's almost impossible to read and accept the majority of the literature without becoming a radical. It's rather ironic that they preach love, tolerance, and acceptance while loudly denouncing Christians, etc. Those who aren't the radicals are frequently denounced for being self-hating gays and are intimidated much like straight people are. And ex-gays are viewed as traitors and objects of alternating ridicule, pity, and hatred.
Many thanks for your honesty and "insider's" insight. Although this is one person's understanding, it confirms my observations and experience. Even non-homosexuals who support so-called "gay rights" often have irrational and rabid hatred for those conservatives - especially religious believers - who consider homosexual behavior immoral and wrong.
It's also interesting that often those who, like myself know same sex acts to be immoral, do *not* hate those who engage in them, although we may be angry at the promotion and forced "acceptance" of homosexuality. On the other hand, it seems that the radical element among homosexuals (and it doesn't appear to be a tiny minority) encourage hatred towards conservatives, especially religious ones. And it's not only aimed towards Christians, it's towards anyone who believes in God and accepts His commandments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.