Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay Totalitarians Perverse Sex Education for Kids
ChronWatch ^ | Tuesday, April 11, 2006 | Linda Kimball

Posted on 04/11/2006 2:50:17 PM PDT by little jeremiah

Gay Totalitarians Perverse Sex Education for Kids

In speaking of ‘gay identity’ politics, Tammy Bruce noted that the “Gay Gestapo” is ‘infuriated most when I declare that my sexuality is not an ‘orientation’ but my ‘preference.' Liberals are always shocked by her honest disclosures because the politically correct stance is that “we are all born this way.” “The silliness of this claim,” commented Tammy, “reinforces the main lie in the Leftist world—that none of us are responsible for our behavior, who we are, or what we become. This ‘gay from birth’ angle also makes it easier to argue for special protections.” The drive for special protections such as forced sensitivity and diversity training, speech codes, and hate crime laws requires homosexuality to be an “identity, as opposed to just a sliver of who we are,” said Tammy. Homosexuality is a “behavior,” noted Tammy, and there is “nothing that makes homosexuals different from anyone else except behavior choices.” “Claiming a gay identity,” declared Ms. Bruce, “is nothing more than a slogan to excuse one self from personal responsibility and personal control. It is the ultimate in individual abandonment.” (Source: “The New American Revolution” Tammy Bruce, pp. 234-235)

Identity politics are the evil spawn of ‘group theory’ (Stalinism). As such, it’s a key element of multiculturalism—the weapon of mass destruction being used by the Left to demolish every trace of traditional America.

“Gay identity politics” is therefore, just one of the many weapons in the Left’s ‘special rights groups’ arsenal. Consequently, gay identity is being used to destroy the traditional family as well as serving as a convenient excuse to separate children from their parents, thus enabling global village mind-conditioners to raise them. It’s also a handy excuse for forcing straights into psycho political mind conditioning sessions, otherwise known as sensitivity and diversity training. Thanks to the public’s naïve acceptance of the myth of sexual orientation queer activists are empowered in their agenda to eradicate our created condition as either male or female while simultaneously sensitizing Americans to accept something wholly unnatural—the twisted notion that they are genderless beings possessed of an ever-expanding range of sexual orientations. Sexual Orientations are collectively referred to as a sexual continuum.

What is sexual continuum? Gloria Filax, of the University of Manitoba revealed that it refers to polymorphously perverse sex. In an essay revelatory of the masochistic Left’s subversive intentions she wrote, “Chris Mayo argues that sex education would better serve children and adolescents if its practitioners attempted to disrupt foundational assumptions that children are (sexually) innocent.” Filax pointed to the “traditional family…propped up by generational differences and heteronormativity (the new racism)” as being the main “problems” which “impinge on our classrooms.” Using the reasoning of Alfred Kinsey, a sadomasochistic homosexual pedophile who declared that babies and children are sexual from birth, Filax stated that “sexuality begins when a child is born” and that “sexuality is polymorphously perverse.” Continuing on, Filax declared that, “we must support Chris Mayo’s conclusion that schools have a responsibility to provide Ob/Scene education; that is, safe sex education.” In a conclusion which clearly supports Ms. Bruce’s premise that “gay identity is…a slogan to excuse one self from personal responsibility and personal control,” Filax declares, “In this way we refocus ourselves in an age of HIV/AIDS as safely polymorphously perverse and control that which is deadly—HIV/AIDS—and not sexuality.” (Source: Ob/Scenely Polymorphously Perverse Sex Education, Gloria Filax, University of Manitoba, http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-Yearbook/97_docs/filax.html)

As Rush Limbaugh famously says: “You just can’t make this stuff up folks!”

Be that as it may, it’s precisely this sort of total abandonment to depravity that leads to this sort of evil: “a grotesque and disturbing pedophilic painting (was) prominently displayed (of) a baby boy lying naked on his back being sodomized by the nipple of a baby bottle.” (Source: “Turning girls into boys” Peter LaBarbera, WorldNetDaily.com, Feb. 2002)

The American Psychiatric Association is in lockstep with the Gay Totalitarians’ polymorphously perverse agenda. In May of 2003, the APA met in San Francisco to debate the normalization of such paraphilias as pedophilia, transvestism, fetishism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism. Dr. Charles Moser of the Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality pompously puffed: “S/M practitioners have been victimized by society as a whole…” Of the utter derangement evidenced by the APA, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, President of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) observed: “It’s a measure of how low the psychiatric establishment has sunk, that it would even debate the idea that pedophilia, transvestism, and sadomasochism could ever be expressions of true human flourishing.” (Source: “Pedophiles/Sex Torturers Seek Normalization” Traditional Values Coalition)

The California Supreme Court is likewise aiding and abetting the Gay Totalitarians. In “California Supremes: Oral Sex with Kids is OK!” Kevin McCullough reported: “On Wednesday, the California Supreme Court voted 6 to 1 to not force those convicted of having oral sex with underage kids to register as sex offenders. The majority judges said…The law was ‘too harsh and unfair.” (Source: WorldNetDaily.com Mar. 10, 2006)

Goose-stepping under the Enlightenment banner: “God is dead, therefore we are at liberty to self-actualize as we please, and to do whatever we want,” criminally-minded Leftists for whom the most abhorrent erotic impulses serve as the mainspring of their lives, have taken command of our schools. In addition to dumbing-down American children, they are twisting their minds so as to condition them to hate their own country. Additionally, under the cloak of sensitivity and diversity training and sex education, Leftist deviants are grooming children to become degenerates and sex predators. This is one reason why America is experiencing a tidal wave of sex predation. Sex predators posing as teachers and other school administration officials are rutting on children and degenerate children are preying on other children.

Reading reports such as the following have become all too common in America: “I’ve never experienced the problems and the degenerate actions of kids as I have this past year,” said bus driver Bob Baxley of Hagerstown, MD who has been driving buses for 12 years.” (Source: As School Bus Sexual Attacks Rise, Danger Often Overlooked, staff writers, washingtonpost.com, June 14, 2005)

The New Totalitarians

Repressive regimes of the past required that all people be submissive to state power. The totalitarianism of socialism differs in that not only does it force complete submission (annihilation of the autonomous individual) but it demands internal assent, meaning that freedom of conscience is criminalized.

Gay Totalitarians and their accomplices have seized control of our schools and they brook no interference or dissent from parents or anyone else for that matter. This was made clear by the arrest of David Parker, a father who sought to protect his young child from being indoctrinated by Gay Totalitarians. (www.article8.org). Their hateful intolerance is likewise evidenced by the nonstop slash and destroy campaign being waged against Brian Camenker, Scott Whiteman and the Parents Rights Coalition of MA. They’ve just been informed that a 6-year old lawsuit against them is being revived. Chief among their crimes is that they dared to expose to the public the stomach-churning, sadomasochistic content of “The Little Black Book—Queer in the 21st Century.” (ibid) This abhorrent filth was distributed by the Gay and Straight Education Network (GSLEN) to hundreds of teens at Brook School, Brookline, MA, April 30, 2005. Additionally, the accused are guilty of exposing that the Gay/Straight Alliance in collusion with MA. Dept. of Education employees had instructed children as young as 12 in a variety of sadomasochistic acts, including the grotesque act known as fisting. (Depraved “Fistgate Incident” here: http://www.massresistance.com/docs/issues/fistgate/massnews.html)

An army of cultural Marxists is waging war against America. They have one aim: Total destruction of our civilization. Among the many organizations making up this treacherous army are: National Organization of Women (NOW), Gay and Straight Alliances, the American Civil Liberties Union, NAACP, Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition, Gay Straight Lesbian Educators Network (GSLEN), Code Pink, and the National Educators Association (NEA). These are but a few of many.

The New Totalitarians ‘house of cards’ is built from lies—big lies, little lies, lies of omission and lies of commission. The antidote to lies and the liars who tell them is Truth—the blunter the better. As noted by Tammy Bruce, the Left is always shocked by her blunt truth. Doubtless they are frightened as well.

Antonin Scalia is another ‘truth-teller’ who recently sent Leftist liars into a tailspin. In a recent speech he was asked about gay issues. His refreshingly honest response was: “Question comes up: is there a Constitutional right to homosexual conduct? Not a hard question for me. It’s absolutely clear that nobody ever thought when the Bill of Rights was adopted that it gave a right to homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct was criminal for 200 years. Easy question.” (Source: 365Gay.com)

It’s time for Truth to become fashionable in America once again. For much too long liars have made lying chic. So let us begin with these most fundamental of truths: “You shall not bear false witness.” “We are men and women made in the image of God.” We are not polymorphously perverse chimps.

About the Writer: Linda Kimball is a writer and author of numerous articles and essays on culture, politics, and world view. Linda receives e-mail at LindyKimball@msn.com.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: education; gaystapo; homosexualagenda; moralabsolutes; sexualorientation; tammybruce; totalitarianism
If anyone thinks the truth is too harsh and ugly and should be swept under the rug, then soon it will be kicking in your door. Pretending it doesn't exist won't make it go away. We need to know the enemy in order to fight the enemy, and it enemy is described in this article with no hyperbole or exaggeration. Prepare to get riled up.

There is nothing worse than destroying the innocence of children.

1 posted on 04/11/2006 2:50:19 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DBeers; wagglebee

One for both lists.


2 posted on 04/11/2006 2:53:22 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus; FormerLib; Coleus; loboinok; FivebyFive

Just pinging a few of you to an article for discussion. Overview of homosexual/pansexual indoctrination of children in schools.


3 posted on 04/11/2006 2:56:29 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

BTTT


4 posted on 04/11/2006 3:00:53 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah


International Academy of Sex Research Joins the Debate: Is Pedophilia a Mental Disorder?


In a recent issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior--the official journal of the International Academy of Sex Research--some clinicians argue that "unusual sexual interests" should not be considered mental disorders.
Bruce Rind, author of the 1998 meta-analysis that claimed to find little or no harm in man-boy sex, joins the discussion; other commentators disagree.


By Linda Ames Nicolosi
The Archives of Sexual Behavior published a special edition in December 2002 to discuss whether pedophilia should remain a mental disorder.

Opening the debate was Richard Green, M.D., J.D. a widely known writer specializing in homosexuality and gender-identity issues. Green argued in favor of removing pedophilia from the diagnostic manual (DSM).

Green was one of the clinicians who, in the 1973, took the side of gay activists to argue for removing homosexuality from the diagnostic manual...

http://www.narth.com/docs/debate2.html


5 posted on 04/11/2006 3:04:53 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Wow. Quite a read.

This ‘gay from birth’ angle also makes it easier to argue for special protections.”

So a gay person says 'I've always felt this way'. But when they were young, could anyone actaully tell? Who gets to decide who's gay and when it matters that this information be known, for this special protection and sensitivity training. At kindergarten? Pre-school? Elementary school? The idea of sexualized grade school kids and pre-schoolers is creepy. Most don't understand what sexuality is (other than giggling at 2 adults kissing) and lack the ability to fully understand. Will there be a committee to examine toddlers for signs of 'gayness' as perceived by these new liberators and then gayness is assigned?

As a former student of psychology, I personally think that for a very small percentage, there is a genetic component but for most others, learned behaviors, often through reinforcing opposite gender roles at critical ages are the causes. But I question the 'gay' sides' motives when someone can only 'discover' they've been gay all along, but apparently a gay person cannot discover they really prefer being straight without 'needing counseling' to combat the guilt they feel at being gay. (I will find the quote for this...)

6 posted on 04/11/2006 3:11:30 PM PDT by fortunecookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Riled up! I'll be back later... need to step away from this machine for a spell.

Thanks for the ping lj.


7 posted on 04/11/2006 3:25:29 PM PDT by loboinok (Gun Control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fortunecookie


"...there is a genetic component ..."

Are you implying there actually exists a "gay gene" ,and

it has been found ?


8 posted on 04/11/2006 3:40:12 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

They don't want to indoctrinate every child ... just yours!


9 posted on 04/11/2006 3:44:47 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

No, not what I meant at all, I guess I was rather vague. Not a gene, but rather a gender issue like someone with certain chromosonal issues such as XXY that definitely affect hormones and gender specific traits. Not a gene. Actually more like a chromosonal disorder. Again pointing more toward disorder rather than the order of a gene. Or hermaphrodites, who aren't necessarily gay or bi, but who are challenged with two, often incomplete, sets of reproductive organs. And even then learned behaviors are often in play.


10 posted on 04/11/2006 3:57:34 PM PDT by fortunecookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
‘gay from birth’

I'll buy this, as long as they're willing to accept that I was born with a propensity to own guns. 'Gun owner from birth', you might say (and my mom still complains about that front sight).

11 posted on 04/11/2006 3:59:28 PM PDT by Hardastarboard (HEY - Billy Joe! You ARE an American Idiot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

"Gay Totalitarianism" is a pretty good term, although I would prefer "Homo Totalitarianism."


12 posted on 04/11/2006 4:22:58 PM PDT by keats5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Ping for later reference...
13 posted on 04/11/2006 4:36:27 PM PDT by Wings-n-Wind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
As if we needed more evidence the "culture war" has long been over, and guess who lost. Lotsa luck fighting the totalitarians running the indoctrination centers for your rugrats, people. The Great American Public is as degenerate as the Romans of the late Republic, and as undeserving of liberty. And frankly, to hell with these loathsome children. From what I've seen, Muffy Soccermom and faded Calvin Klein backward baseball-hat wearing Dah-dee are perfectly willing to fill their larvae with the Simpsons, Yo MTV Raps, and Will and Grace while keeping them safe from the dangerous world Beyond the End of the Driveway. If you have the misfortune of being caught behind a bus when the skules disgorge their charges, and have the further misfortune of being in a residential area, you may watch in awe as the vehicle stops at every friggin' driveway and a single roly-poly child waddles from the bus to Mummy's SUV which then DRIVES the porky little bugger up to the McMansion, where a warm TV and bag of Doritos await. Or maybe little Morgan or little Justin can look forward to a carefully structured afterschool regimen of soccer and a conversational Mandarin lesson. Soccer is a queer, Communist-inspired excuse for a sport, people. If your children play soccer, they will either become gay activists for the Democratic Party or revolt completely at adolescence, take lots of drugs, carve Viking runes into their flesh, and kill Mummy and Dah-dee in their sleep, which they richly deserve. Sweet Suffering Jesus, the more I see of the American People the more I pray for a global thermonuclear exchange. These pasty, television-addled zombies wearing Disneyland T-shirts and rubberized sandals, slapping soccerball appliques and white oval stickers with various silhouettes on them on the backs of their Escalades... (Hoyyyyy!! My chill-dren play soc-cer! We have a Black Lab!!!) Can these people really be the descendants of the generation that swung to Count Basie, built the Arsenal of Democracy and designed the 1958 Cadillac 60 Special? Or are they alien pod creatures who came to this planet 40 years ago and took over? I can't call it. But as far as moral backbone is concerned, America has become an invertebrate organism. Societies and civilizations never regenerate, folks. Practically a law of history. So do the sensible thing. Tell the boss how much you've always wanted to eviscerate him, burn your car in the parking lot, sell the house and kids, and observe with as much philosophical detachment as you can muster the Great American Train Wreck. Or maybe just pop a cold one and watch Seinfeld reruns. Better still, wait a few years. I'm certain the new Emperor will put on grand shows for his subjects. And on all the major networks, no doubt.
14 posted on 04/11/2006 4:39:08 PM PDT by infidel dog (nearer my God to thee....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

I'll buy this, as long as they're willing to accept that I was born with a propensity to own guns. 'Gun owner from birth', you might say (and my mom still complains about that front sight)


I love it! LOL!! Now just conjure up your very own 'cultural narrative' in order to 'authenticate' your 'orientation."


15 posted on 04/11/2006 4:51:08 PM PDT by Lindykim (Courage is the first of all the virtues...if you haven*t courage, you may not have the opportunity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

The fruits of the work of Theodore Adorno, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse. Straight from the Frankfurt school agenda.
This agenda is 100% supported by the ACLU.


16 posted on 04/11/2006 4:52:22 PM PDT by oneofmany (Slaying the Fifth Column with the Truth as my sword.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: infidel dog

Hey, don't hold back; no need to tiptoe through the tulips. Tell us how you really feel, you're among friends.


17 posted on 04/11/2006 5:01:13 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: infidel dog

Sad to say, you are absolutely correct.

I am still a bit optimistic because there are a lot of people that also feel this way.


18 posted on 04/11/2006 5:08:40 PM PDT by be4everfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan; AggieCPA; Agitate; AliVeritas; AllTheRage; An American In Dairyland; Annie03; ...

The Natural Laws Can Not Be Denied
- Resistance Is Futile!

Homosexual Agenda Ping!

To be included in or removed from the
HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA PING LIST,
please FReepMail either DBeers or DirtyHarryY2k.

Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search

My added working commentary on the fallacy subjects of "orientation" & "gay rights" (feel free to provide criticism and input):

Sexual Orientation -- What about Religious Orientation?

Like religion, homosexuality is subjectively determined and declared -NOT objectively determined and confirmed via some objective scientific test. If one feels they are a homosexual and declares they are -who can disagree with them? Who can objectively identify a homosexual person? If those that declare homosexuality become a protected class or exceptional class of individuals warranting extra 'rights' above and beyond those already afforded all human beings THEN what is to prevent everyone from claiming the socially rewarded, prized, and critically acclaimed homosexual status?

Can one imagine a court case on the issue -how can one prove or disprove homosexuality -the basis for all this stuff the leftists are pushing? This reality begs the legal question of sexual "orientation" presumption that at one time was based upon reality e.g. genetalia and now would go unanswered by the new world leftist spectrum of subjective gender premise. The question: in essence will society choose homosexual until proved heterosexual OR heterosexual until proved homosexual? Curious minds want to know? LOL

Now, if homosexual activity was suggested as a test to prove homosexuality then who could prove they would choose to engage in homosexual activity -how do they prove it; must they actually engage in and document homosexual activities to prove homosexual status? Very odd the attempt to equate homosexual status as an innate state of being independent from the only thing that differentiates it from the norm of heterosexuality when considering that heterosexuals are heterosexuals even if remaining celibate virgins.

Should rights be based upon sexual feelings or even more on sexual activities that must be proven? It is a fact that feelings are subjective. Consequently, how can any rights be derived from something subjective? In fact, 'buying into' the subjective argument by default implies that rights are given to individuals arbitrarily by the State and as such can be taken away arbitrarily by the State. The whole 'feelings' argument kicks our Founder's recognition of unalienable rights which is basis for our Independence, Union, and Constitution to the curb...

YES -the whole 'feelings' argument guarantees that rights are and will be always subject to the whim of those 'in charge'... How bizarre is it to seek a goal with an argument that if accepted actually nullifies the goal? This is the way of the left...

The homosexual portion of the culture war debate is not about rights -it is all about homosexual sex. Homosexuality is subjectively determined and or declared -NOT objectively determined or declared. I myself can not objectively identify a homosexual person -hence stereotypes are meaningless as are any anecdotal 'things' e.g. 'knowing one or many homosexuals (those you may 'feel are homosexuals or those who may feel they are homosexuals or those who may declare they are homosexuals). One can not rightly judge the heart of an individual; however one can judge an activity.

Assuming people are not animals driven by instinct -that people possess an authentic freedom to choose what they do or do not do (unless they suffer some disorder) THEN one can come to but only one objective and rational conclusion. As to homosexuality -truly, it is ONLY sexual activity one chooses to engage in that objectively differentiates homosexual from heterosexual -regardless any subjective 'feelings'...

If one truly understands the subjectivity versus objectivity arguments then one should see clearly the fatally flawed premise underlying subjectivity arguments for homosexual 'rights' and anyone should easily realize that subjectivity flies directly in the face of establishing any objective 'homosexuality' rights or pursuing any objective 'homosexuality' discrimination claims or even objective claims that there is a hatred of homosexuality using the much espoused homophobia meme that some in this discussion indignantly cite.

Legislation and or social mandate regarding just versus unjust discrimination with subsequent social fostering reward versus social penalizing can only be legitimately based upon objective innate characteristics e.g. race and or constitutionally guaranteed activities e.g. religion.

Religion is a constitutionally guaranteed activity -homosexual sex is not. If homosexual sex was guaranteed by the Constitution then I would suggest that at a maximum it would not be mandated, at a minimum like religion there would be the misinterpreted yet very applicable separation clause e.g. a separation of Sex & State... One would not see mandated public school 'indoctrination' of "homosexuality is normal or a valid option" stuff being mandated upon children by judges or homosexual agenda activist groups...

Judges that attempt to create or groups that advocate for special rights above and beyond already realized human rights advocate for these special rights premised upon either a totally subjective self-declared 'orientation' or ones choice of sexual activities. The advocates and judges are simply plying a smoke and mirrors approach in attempt to hoist homosexual activity into acceptance under the guise of providing human rights to individuals already possessing such human rights.

Case in point: US Federal, State, and Local Government entities at this time both set aside contracts and give preference on contracts to minority business owners. I can state unequivocally that 'homosexual' business owners will never be afforded such favor. Answering why I can make such an assured observation quickly gets to the root of the matter and completely knocks down the card house that homosexual agenda proponents attempt to erect...


19 posted on 04/11/2006 7:12:49 PM PDT by DBeers ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: infidel dog

Wipe the froth from your chin


20 posted on 04/12/2006 5:34:48 AM PDT by SaintDismas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

BTTT


21 posted on 04/12/2006 5:54:46 AM PDT by Lindykim (Courage is the first of all the virtues...if you haven*t courage, you may not have the opportunity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

BTTT again.


22 posted on 04/12/2006 8:10:54 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Great analysis.


23 posted on 04/12/2006 8:22:40 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fortunecookie
>>>Not a gene, but rather a gender issue like someone with certain chromosonal issues such as XXY that definitely affect hormones and gender specific traits. Not a gene.

Not a GENE but a CHROMOSONE?

Here, http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/launchpad/

have some light reading so you don't contradict yourself again.

24 posted on 04/12/2006 8:40:11 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Thank you for the link, duly noted and read. I'm not a biologist or geneticist (you noticed), I was attempting to distinguish between chromosonal disorders (yes, in gene's) versus a specific gene found to specifically determine gayness, with no underlying disorder therein. IOW, a gene that determines 'gayness' just like a gene that determines eye color. Has science determined that such a gene exists?


25 posted on 04/12/2006 10:51:47 AM PDT by fortunecookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: fortunecookie

No. No such gene exists.


26 posted on 04/12/2006 10:57:08 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Great analysis.

Thanks. Feel free to borrow it -feel free to recommend changes and additions.

here is my latest version -I added to and edited a couple paragraphs in the middle.

Sexual Orientation -- What about Religious Orientation?

Like religion, homosexuality is subjectively determined and declared -NOT objectively determined and confirmed via some objective scientific test. If one feels they are a homosexual and declares they are -who can disagree with them? Who can objectively identify a homosexual person? If those that declare homosexuality become a protected class or exceptional class of individuals warranting extra 'rights' above and beyond those already afforded all human beings THEN what is to prevent everyone from claiming the socially rewarded, prized, and critically acclaimed homosexual status?

Can one imagine a court case on the issue -how can one prove or disprove homosexuality -the basis for all this stuff the leftists are pushing? This reality begs the legal question of sexual "orientation" presumption that at one time was based upon reality e.g. genetalia and now would go unanswered by the new world leftist spectrum of subjective gender premise. The question: in essence will society choose homosexual until proved heterosexual OR heterosexual until proved homosexual? Curious minds want to know?

Now, if homosexual activity was suggested as a test to prove homosexuality then who could prove they would choose to engage in homosexual activity -how do they prove it; must they actually engage in and document homosexual activities to prove homosexual status? Very odd the attempt to equate homosexual status as an innate state of being independent from the only thing that differentiates it from the norm of heterosexuality when considering that heterosexuals are heterosexuals even if remaining celibate virgins.

It is still an established scientific fact and once was a universally accepted fact that all human beings are heterosexual (a scientific term describing those sexually procreative by means of two sexes e.g. male & female versus asexual which is self procreative).

The whole 'homosexual' (non-scientific term) innate identity thing is leftist propaganda. 'Homosexuals' are simply disordered heterosexuals -heterosexuals that feel predisposed to or actually choose to engage in homosexual activities. 'Sex' as it applies to the heterosexual term is scientifically premised in procreation while 'gender' as it applies to the disordered heterosexual (homosexual) term is leftist derived propaganda premised in at best selfish pursuit of recreational sex that by default can not procreate.

There are some that argue homosexuality and or orientation are scientifically proved realities. I say HA! There is no physical orientation test. Science supposedly deals with the physical -'orientation' is metaphysical... That which the scientists supposedly claim is so and supposedly objectively research a cause or reason for is at best a subjective and dynamic condition -cause unknown. Homosexuality is objectively a manifested procreative abnormality cause unknown that would best be termed homosexual orientation syndrome. All this regardless the psychologists and psychiatrists who without scientific basis turn science on its head and claim normality for that which by scientific definition is not the norm.

What of homosexual rights? Should rights be based upon sexual feelings (orientation) or even more on sexual activities that must be proved? It is a fact that feelings are subjective. Consequently, how can any rights be derived from something subjective? In fact, 'buying into' the subjective argument by default implies that rights are given to individuals arbitrarily by the State and as such can be taken away arbitrarily by the State. The whole 'feelings' argument kicks our Founder's recognition of unalienable rights which is basis for our Independence, Union, and Constitution to the curb...

YES -the whole 'feelings' argument guarantees that rights are and will be always subject to the whim of those 'in charge'... How bizarre is it to seek a goal with an argument that if accepted actually nullifies the goal? This is the way of the left...

The homosexual portion of the culture war debate is not about rights -it is all about homosexual sex. The question before society is a simple one; do those that engage in homosexual sex merit privilege and or special rights? It is homosexual sex; not people, that society judges and decides upon -discriminates against or rewards. Society can not rightly judge the heart of an individual; however society can judge an activity. Yes, there are no majestic platitudes comprising human rights questions to be pondered here. When considering this issue the questions to be answered are really quite simple as they involve one activity alone and fall far below the platitudes touted by the left. The answers are objectively obvious when one considers the objective fact that premises the contribution of sexual activity to fostering society. Even the militant delusional can not deny that homosexual sex is a procreative dead end.

Homosexuality is subjectively determined and or declared -NOT objectively determined or declared. I myself can not objectively identify a homosexual person -hence stereotypes are meaningless as are any anecdotal 'things' e.g. 'knowing' one or many homosexuals (those you may 'feel' are homosexual or those who may 'feel' they are homosexuals or those who may declare they are homosexual).

Assuming people are not animals driven by instinct -that people possess an authentic freedom to choose what they do or do not do (unless they suffer some disorder) THEN one can come to but only one objective and rational conclusion. As to homosexuality -truly, it is ONLY sexual activity one chooses to engage in that objectively differentiates homosexual from heterosexual -regardless any subjective 'feelings'...

If one truly understands the subjectivity versus objectivity arguments then one should see clearly the fatally flawed premise underlying subjectivity arguments for homosexual 'rights' and anyone should easily realize that subjectivity flies directly in the face of establishing any objective 'homosexuality' rights or pursuing any objective 'homosexuality' discrimination claims or even objective claims that there is a hatred of homosexuality using the much espoused homophobia meme that some in this discussion indignantly cite.

Legislation and or social mandate regarding just versus unjust discrimination with subsequent social fostering reward versus social penalizing can only be legitimately based upon objective innate characteristics e.g. race and or constitutionally guaranteed activities e.g. religion.

Religion is a constitutionally guaranteed activity -homosexual sex is not. If homosexual sex was guaranteed by the Constitution then I would suggest that at a maximum it would not be mandated, at a minimum like religion there would be the misinterpreted yet very applicable separation clause e.g. a separation of Sex & State... One would not see mandated public school 'indoctrination' of "homosexuality is normal or a valid option" stuff being mandated upon children by judges or homosexual agenda activist groups...

Judges that attempt to create or groups that advocate for special rights above and beyond already realized human rights advocate for these special rights premised upon either a totally subjective self-declared 'orientation' or ones choice of sexual activities. The advocates and judges are simply plying a smoke and mirrors approach in attempt to hoist homosexual activity into acceptance under the guise of providing human rights to individuals already possessing such human rights.

Case in point: US Federal, State, and Local Government entities at this time both set aside contracts and give preference on contracts to minority business owners. I can state unequivocally that 'homosexual' business owners will never be afforded such favor. Answering why I can make such an assured observation quickly gets to the root of the matter and completely knocks down the card house that homosexual agenda proponents attempt to erect...


27 posted on 04/12/2006 11:49:37 AM PDT by DBeers ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

DBeers: "it is all about homosexual sex".

In the 'dialectically-untwisted' lexicon of our Founders day, the word 'sex' was used to designate whether one was male or female (the reality of genitalia plus other biological determinants, as you pointed out in your excellent analysis).


So the acts in which males & females who have 'fallen off of the straight and narrow" engage in are nothing to do with sex in its proper understanding. They are carnal acts whose genesis was from dark impulses which then grew into an even darker fantasy which then leads to acting out the erotic fantasy if the occasion arises.


28 posted on 04/12/2006 12:29:50 PM PDT by Lindykim (Courage is the first of all the virtues...if you haven*t courage, you may not have the opportunity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

Your comments hit the target. Obtaining some kind of sexual gratification in a manner which has nothing to do with the potential procreative act isn't "sex" at all.
And I am not limiting the potential procreative act only to fertile women and men. Some women and men cannot conceive, through no fault of their own (age, defect, etc). But they are not straying from the ideal.

Acts involving same sex participants, devices, various unnatural methods - isn't "sex" at all. It's actually a form of torture and abuse.


29 posted on 04/12/2006 1:10:41 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

LJ: "It's actually a form of torture and abuse"

Exactly. And the 'pleasure" in these instances is sadistic in that the 'dominant' gains stimulation/pleasure from the pain which the "submissive' must endure. It's truly twisted, and this is what kids are being initiated into. Our nation is going to be afflicted by a whole crop of sadists in the months and years ahead.


30 posted on 04/12/2006 1:46:58 PM PDT by Lindykim (Courage is the first of all the virtues...if you haven*t courage, you may not have the opportunity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim
So the acts in which males & females who have 'fallen off of the straight and narrow" engage in are nothing to do with sex in its proper understanding. They are carnal acts whose genesis was from dark impulses which then grew into an even darker fantasy which then leads to acting out the erotic fantasy if the occasion arises.

Good amplifying and informative post -- are you aware that your post generally mirrors Catholic teaching on the subject?

Thanks!

I will borrow your posting and expound upon the theme...

31 posted on 04/12/2006 9:48:35 PM PDT by DBeers ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim; All

Hey, folks! Check out this article. It's a message we ignore at our extreme peril.


32 posted on 04/12/2006 9:51:33 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson