Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?"

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Haven
Guru
Posts: 1803
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:23 pm
Location: Tremonton, Utah
Has thanked: 70 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?"

Post #1

Post by Haven »

In another thread, 99% posted this:
[color=deeppink]99percentatheism[/color] wrote: Why don't you or Haven (the author of the OP) show us the compatibility between the gay agenda, gay culture and Christian life? I've never seen anyone be able to connect the two in all reality.
I asked him to provide evidence for this "gay agenda" and "gay culture," and I made it clear that there were no such things. Yet he continues to use the terms, and many anti-gay Christians continue to believe in the "gay agenda" or "gay culture."

Debate question: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?" What evidence do you have to support your position?
♥ Haven (she/her) ♥
♥ Kindness is the greatest adventure ♥

User avatar
Wootah
Savant
Posts: 9161
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 186 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Post #2

Post by Wootah »

What do you think he means by the terms?

There are clearly groups that exist with an agenda to promote homosexuality.

I think that there are efforts to make homosexuality so normal that same sex attraction should be greeted with the same joy as opposite sex attraction.

I think it is part of the agenda of equal rights, which is a bankrupt but revered philosophy in our age. We all know that there is nothing equal in life so we equally know that it is a pretence used by various groups to gouge the society for favours.

So yes I think it is an agenda. It's one I'm for in so much as I think there is a secular world where we should all be free to operate in and pursue 'our happiness' because I don't want to be persecuted either.

However I believe in equality under God and equality in the law and protection under it. So it's difficult because the sense of equality we have is from God, it's a Judeo-Christian concept.

And technically our society does offer the equality you want. We are equal under the law. So what other issues pro homosexual groups desire is clearly an agenda.
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

DanieltheDragon
Savant
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
Location: Charlotte
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #3

Post by DanieltheDragon »

[Replying to post 2 by Wootah]

To me this rings of a conspiracy theory. That there is a secretive gay agenda!!!

It is true there are gay rights advocates, but lets be clear and call it what it is. Gay rights advocates. I can even give you a list of groups that promote these rights.


As far as gay culture go I suppose that would be a culture that is associated with individuals whom identify as homosexual and not bisexual or transgendered.

It is the same as me saying the straight culture or black culture or white culture or american culture. It is the culture of the group you are talking about. Cultures inherently don't have agendas it is a set of customs that describe a particular group.

There is no gay agenda because gay people are not hive minded. That is like saying the atheist agenda or the christian agenda. People don't go around and saying Apple fan agenda do they?



I think that there are efforts to make homosexuality so normal that same sex attraction should be greeted with the same joy as opposite sex attraction.
How else are we to treat people who are attracted to each other in horror disdain shame? please I am confused by this statement can you clarify how I should greet people who are LGBT?

I think it is part of the agenda of equal rights, which is a bankrupt but revered philosophy in our age. We all know that there is nothing equal in life so we equally know that it is a pretence used by various groups to gouge the society for favours.
This I have no idea what you are talking about. How is someone who wants to be treated as an equal gouging society for favors :-k .

equal does not mean more or less than. Gouging for favors would imply greater than. That would not be an equal right would it? That would be a greater rights advocate.


Lets take marriage for instance.


Under US law a marriage is a financial and legal contract between two individuals to grant them a certain set of benefits under the law as well as dealing with certain legal issues.

examples of such are

Tax breaks on dependents
visitation rights for significant others
child custody issues
inheritance issues
insurance issues.


so are you saying that a woman and a man can have these rights under the law but a woman and a woman cannot.

It seems to me that the only gouging of rights is from the straight culture or straight agenda....

Wordleymaster1
Apprentice
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #4

Post by Wordleymaster1 »

Haven wrote: In another thread, 99% posted this:
[color=deeppink]99percentatheism[/color] wrote: Why don't you or Haven (the author of the OP) show us the compatibility between the gay agenda, gay culture and Christian life? I've never seen anyone be able to connect the two in all reality.
I asked him to provide evidence for this "gay agenda" and "gay culture," and I made it clear that there were no such things. Yet he continues to use the terms, and many anti-gay Christians continue to believe in the "gay agenda" or "gay culture."

Debate question: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?" What evidence do you have to support your position?
There are all types of cultures - even in the animal kingdom. So YES, there is a gay culture. And YES, there's probably a gay agenda form some people. But normally when 'gay agenda' is used it's meant to be a push to force people into accepting gays or some other negative thing. With that definition, the only 'gay agenda' is the one pushed by the anti-gay people like 99%.

99percentatheism
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 9:49 am

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #5

Post by 99percentatheism »

Haven wrote: In another thread, 99% posted this:
[color=deeppink]99percentatheism[/color] wrote: Why don't you or Haven (the author of the OP) show us the compatibility between the gay agenda, gay culture and Christian life? I've never seen anyone be able to connect the two in all reality.
I asked him to provide evidence for this "gay agenda" and "gay culture," and I made it clear that there were no such things. Yet he continues to use the terms, and many anti-gay Christians continue to believe in the "gay agenda" or "gay culture."

Debate question: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?" What evidence do you have to support your position?
Yes.

The very term "anti-gay Christians" affirms that. Jesus, RE-defining marriage as immutably man and woman, is then to be considered an anti-gay?"

This is part of gay culture and the gay agenda. As is the celebration of homosexual behavior and the redefining of marriage. To say that consistent Christian morality is "anti-gay" is obviously part of a gay agenda and gay culture. That anti-Christians use similar language does not change the reality of the gay agenda and gay culture.
The Homosexual Agenda is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate approval of homosexuality and homosexual ideology, along with the strategies used to implement such. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in public school, restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining special treatment for homosexuals, distorting Biblical teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for homosexuals that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see hate speech, hate crimes). Such special rights will necessarily come at the expense of the rights of broader society. The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the right of free speech today.
In 2014, one of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw conversion therapy, particularly for teenagers. California and New Jersey are the only states to have enacted such laws (Governor Chris Christie signed it into law as he was preparing his reelection campaign), and leftists are pushing similar bans in many other states now.
In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in Jamaica, Brian Camenker of MassResistance outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:[1]
legalize homosexuality
promote gay pride parades
demand non-discrimination laws
insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
push the homosexual agenda in schools
force "gay marriage" on society
demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
promote the transgender agenda
impose a large-scale loss of free speech
ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
attack churches

- http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda
To continue:
The Homosexual Agenda

Joseph P. Gudel, in That Which is Unnatural[3] contended that the homosexual movement,
has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.
In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives. [4]

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted gay activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.[5]

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 kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of Parker v. Hurley.[6]

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News and World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, "Children of the Rainbow", stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, Gloria Goes to Gay Pride, states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."
Leo commented,

A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).[7]

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive Crafting “Gay� Children,[8] reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.[9] And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,� (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings. [10]


This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called After the Ball, by gay rights activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to 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."


[11] "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."[12]



Focus on the Family provides additional quotes from After the Ball, outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:[11][13]
"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
"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.[14] �
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.
Specific goals

The goals of the homosexual movement include:
Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
Reminding the world that marriage is a legal term and standing in the US, not a spiritual one as believed by Christians.
Ignore the clear message of the Bible that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination unto God because their first amendment rights allow them to.
Remind conservatives that there cannot be a gay gene, just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.[15]
Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"[16][17][18]
Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality[19]
Lobbying for equal employment rights.[20][21]
Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.[22]
Ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality[23]
Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference[24]
Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
In places like Massachusetts and California, where the gay lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. 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." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
Demands protections from job discrimination. [25]
Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was breaking the law. [26]
Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality[27]
Pushing for legalized adoption by gay individuals and couples[28]
Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
The state-by-state push for same-sex marriage can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.[29] An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions legal.[30]
Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists have recently been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the Obama administration. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in Massachusetts, noted that the President has,
signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
Demanded the State Department allow gay couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.[31]
Strategies and psychological tactics
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in specious argumentation, such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see homosexuality and biblical interpretation), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.[32] This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"[33], as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[45] Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.[46]
While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, these have been promoted by leading homosexual activists. The aforementioned book, After the Ball, is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which two Harvard-trained (homosexual) psychologists [47] Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) and Hunter Madsen (pen name Erastes Pill, who was also schooled in social marketing) advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims instead, while making all those who opposed them to be 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. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "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 straight people feel very uncomfortable."
"Jamming" homo-hatred (disagreement with homosexual behaviors) was to be done by linking it to Nazi horror, advised 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..."[48][49]
Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts homosexuality and biblical interpretation examine and expose.][50]
Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [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"[51] “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.�[52][53]
Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."[54]
The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.
“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.�[55]
David Kupelian, author of The Marketing of Evil, describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, work with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.[56]
Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 47.[57] The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.
Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.[58] In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.[59]
The charge of homophobia has also been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation 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 homosexuals, or of being a bigot persecuting 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.[60]
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.[61]
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 [is] 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."[62]
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 imagine that those who oppose them are fearful of them, or of being one.
Influence in the academic world
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled First Things (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
“ [Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.[63] �
Opposing Christian Agenda

Liberals are critical of Christian groups that oppose homosexuality. These criticisms include Christian activities of:
Threatening to shut Salvation Army soup kitchens in New York if they cannot exclude homosexuals from employment [64]
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[65]
Calling anyone who supports gay rights a 'sinner' or other untrue insults.

- http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda


References

↑ http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2 ... index.html
↑ http://www.latimes.com/news/world/world ... 3280.story]
↑ "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8
↑ Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.
↑ Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43
↑ 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."
↑ John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.
↑ http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/re ... 390601.pdf
↑ Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319
↑ See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.
↑ 11.0 11.1 After the Ball (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda] Citizenlink
↑ After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)
↑ 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
↑ Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos. Mass Resistance
↑ Video:Silencing Christians
↑ Homosexuality: It’s a Crime in England to State Christian Views
↑ Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009
↑ White, Hilary (04-21-2006) Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt LifeSiteNews.com
↑ The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) A Box of Their Own? (opinion) The Crimson
↑ www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000
↑ 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); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)
↑ National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs
↑ [http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nond ... _main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
↑ Fox News - eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service after Lawsuit
↑ http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_ce ... enge_exgay
↑ http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family
↑ Lewis v. Harris
↑ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articl ... ons_legal/
↑ update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM
↑ Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church
↑ Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.
↑ http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/s ... ality.html
↑ http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strate ... e_ball.htm
↑ http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526
↑ http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/ ... tacks.html
↑ http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/e ... ark-street
↑ http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/ho ... rmons.html
↑ http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm
↑ http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html
↑ http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296
↑ Muehlenberg, Bill, Another Nail in the Christian Coffin, 4 June 2009
↑ Loud homosexual activists disrupt and halt Don Feder speech at UMass Amherst, despite police presence"
↑ LZ Granderson, Commentary: Gay is not the new black, Cable News Network,July 16, 2009
↑ Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda
↑ http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html
↑ http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mbarber/080213
↑ http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strate ... e_ball.htm
↑ After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won, Thursday, June 3rd, 2004
↑ After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)
↑ Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi
↑ Behavior and Not a Person
↑ The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.
↑ Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363
↑ http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/0 ... -evil.html
↑ http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDe ... =134544248
↑ Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal
↑ Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban The Independent
↑ [http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995p ... rides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]
↑ [Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]
↑ http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage
↑ Homosexuality, by F. Earle Fox, David W. Virtue, p. 12
↑ [1]Salvation Army Uses Homeless To Fight Gay Benefits
↑ Concerned Women For America About page
↑ http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/
↑ http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/
↑ http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp? ... yid=family

Wordleymaster1
Apprentice
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #6

Post by Wordleymaster1 »

[Replying to post 5 by 99percentatheism]
The very term "anti-gay Christians" affirms that.
Is that REALLY affirming? Seems to me it's a way to differentiate the Christian population, which is Christianity's fault for being so able to be divided upon itself
Jesus, RE-defining marriage as immutably man and woman, is then to be considered an anti-gay?"
You'd probably have to ask him directly - no one here should think they can speak for him
This is part of gay culture and the gay agenda. As is the celebration of homosexual behavior and the redefining of marriage. To say that consistent Christian morality is "anti-gay" is obviously part of a gay agenda and gay culture. That anti-Christians use similar language does not change the reality of the gay agenda and gay culture.
Of course there's a gay agenda as said before. It's about legal protection and anti-discrimination. There are people part of the pro-gay movement on both ends of the bell curve, just like there are Christians on both sides of their curve. Are those outliers to be considered the core? I would hope not.

DanieltheDragon
Savant
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
Location: Charlotte
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #7

Post by DanieltheDragon »

[Replying to post 5 by 99percentatheism]

Seems to me the only people defining a "gay agenda" are people such as yourself and not LGBT individuals. You had a quote from a Homosexual spokesperson. How do you think that individual can speak to the thoughts and whims of all LGBT individuals in the same way that you can speak to the thoughts and whims of all christians?

What I find concerning is that, the label spokesperson is being applied to an individual. Do we know what advocacy group he represents? Do we know anything about this individual.

However if you really take a look at what they are saying about wanting to be affirmed its hyperbole. They are basically saying when they want the government to affirm them is they want to be treated as an equal in the eye of the law. Which they should be that doesn't mean that you have to accept them but that the government should.

And really why not why should LGBT individuals be considered second class citizens becuase lets not mince words thats what they are. What if there was a law stating that christians cannot get married? and everyone else got all the legal rights associated with marriage except christians.

99percentatheism
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 9:49 am

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #8

Post by 99percentatheism »

DanieltheDragon
[Replying to post 5 by 99percentatheism]
Seems to me the only people defining a "gay agenda" are people such as yourself and not LGBT individuals.
The "Who?" the "What?" The very act of defining people in a definable group proves that there is a culture and an agenda of that group.

Thank you. Validation is just that easy.
You had a quote from a Homosexual spokesperson.
A What? A Who? A homosexual speaking for the agenda and a culture.
How do you think that individual can speak to the thoughts and whims of all LGBT individuals in the same way that you can speak to the thoughts and whims of all christians?
Interesting, "Christians" with a lower case c, but LGBT with upper case.

Validation screaming its validation.
What I find concerning is that, the label spokesperson is being applied to an individual. Do we know what advocacy group he represents? Do we know anything about this individual.
Other than his teenage lover, who and what did Harvey Milk speak about and for?

What does Soulforce and Matthew Vines speak for and about?

Culture and agenda.

Kuhbang!
However if you really take a look at what they are saying about wanting to be affirmed its hyperbole.
Hyperbole? It is a political and social demand of a culture and its agenda.

Echo, echo, echo, echo
They are basically saying when they want the government to affirm them is they want to be treated as an equal in the eye of the law. Which they should be that doesn't mean that you have to accept them but that the government should.
You just defined and reaffirmed a culture and its agenda.
And really why not why should LGBT individuals be considered second class citizens becuase lets not mince words thats what they are. What if there was a law stating that christians cannot get married? and everyone else got all the legal rights associated with marriage except christians.
Lower case c for Christians again huh?

Agenda based on a culture?

Be your insulting lower case c as it may be (and is typical and to be expected), the very fact that you used L G B T proves yet again a culture (movement even) and an agenda (movement based).

I believe this thread is over.

It's usually this easy but not this quickly.

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #9

Post by Danmark »

Wootah wrote: What do you think he means by the terms?

There are clearly groups that exist with an agenda to promote homosexuality.

I think that there are efforts to make homosexuality so normal that same sex attraction should be greeted with the same joy as opposite sex attraction.

I think it is part of the agenda of equal rights, which is a bankrupt but revered philosophy in our age. We all know that there is nothing equal in life so we equally know that it is a pretence used by various groups to gouge the society for favours.

So yes I think it is an agenda. It's one I'm for in so much as I think there is a secular world where we should all be free to operate in and pursue 'our happiness' because I don't want to be persecuted either.

However I believe in equality under God and equality in the law and protection under it. So it's difficult because the sense of equality we have is from God, it's a Judeo-Christian concept.

And technically our society does offer the equality you want. We are equal under the law. So what other issues pro homosexual groups desire is clearly an agenda.

No, there is no 'gay agenda,' other than the goal we should all strive for which is equal rights and equal treatment under the law. I believe it is error to claim there are groups that 'promote homosexuality.' It is fairer to say there are groups who promote the acceptance of sexuality that differs from that claimed by the majority.

Wootah, I have previously shown you that the concept of equality predates Christianity. It is at least as old as Athenian democracy. Furthermore both the Jewish and Christian traditions have demonstrated they are anti equality. The Hebrews were aggressively tribal. If you were not a member of the tribe, you were certainly not the equal of a member. There was no equality in the family. Their society was patriarchal and the first born son had rights the other children did not share. They believed in slavery. These anti equality traditions were adopted by Christians. Women were not even allowed to speak in church. Christianity promotes the concept of 'the elect' and that some are predestined to eternal life and special places in heaven.

The idea of equality is still developing in Christianity. The church I was raised in split from the Methodists over the issue freedom from slavery and the abolition of the 'pew tax' where the wealthier members of the congregation paid for favored seats in the church. We still see this ugly strain in Christianity today with the preaching of the 'prosperity gospel.'

Even today the Christian culture looks at gays and lesbians as second class citizens who should not have the same rights heterosexuals have. Right on this forum we have seen insulting language directed at gays and lesbians. The anti gay agenda has a distinctly Christian flavor to it and it is anti equality.

User avatar
Haven
Guru
Posts: 1803
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:23 pm
Location: Tremonton, Utah
Has thanked: 70 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: Is there a "gay agenda" or "gay culture?&

Post #10

Post by Haven »

[color=red]99percentatheism[/color] wrote:
The very term "anti-gay Christians" affirms that. Jesus, RE-defining marriage as immutably man and woman, is then to be considered an anti-gay?"
The term is accurate when applied to that subset of Christians who oppose equality for LGBT people. Not all Christians are heterosexists, you know.

As for Jesus: by today's standards, would be considered a bigot on multiple levels. From what little we know about his upbringing in 1st-century Jewish culture and what fragments of his teachings survive in Christian writings (although these have probably have been distorted), he was likely sexist and racist. He was probably homophobic too, although there is no record of him mentioning gay people directly. He was, like all people, a product of his time and social environment.

If I'm allowed to speculate, I believe that if Jesus were alive today (and really was a person who preached love), he'd support LGBTQIA rights. There was also no record of him being married (which was highly unusual at the time), and so Jesus may well have been gay himself. Maybe if he were born in the modern world instead of ignorant ancient Israel, he'd be leading Pride parades with his loving, hunky husband.
[color=brown]99%[/color] wrote:This is part of gay culture and the gay agenda. As is the celebration of homosexual behavior and the redefining of marriage. To say that consistent Christian morality is "anti-gay" is obviously part of a gay agenda and gay culture. That anti-Christians use similar language does not change the reality of the gay agenda and gay culture.
No one would say that the "celebration" of heterosexual behavior and the exclusionary definition of marriage is part of a straight agenda, so why is the push for equality for homosexual behavior, marriage, and, most importantly, gay people as a whole, a "gay agenda?" It makes no sense.
[color=deeppink]Conservapedia, a right-wing hate site[/color] wrote:The Homosexual Agenda [snip]
Conservapedia -- talk about propaganda!
[color=pink]Conservapedia[/color] wrote:. . . is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate approval of homosexuality and homosexual ideology, along with the strategies used to implement such. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in public school, restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining special treatment for homosexuals, distorting Biblical teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for homosexuals that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see hate speech, hate crimes). Such special rights will necessarily come at the expense of the rights of broader society. The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the right of free speech today.
In 2014, one of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw conversion therapy, particularly for teenagers. California and New Jersey are the only states to have enacted such laws (Governor Chris Christie signed it into law as he was preparing his reelection campaign), and leftists are pushing similar bans in many other states now.
In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in Jamaica, Brian Camenker of MassResistance outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:[1]
legalize homosexuality
promote gay pride parades
demand non-discrimination laws
insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
push the homosexual agenda in schools
force "gay marriage" on society
demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
promote the transgender agenda
impose a large-scale loss of free speech
ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
attack churches

- http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda
OK, that's as twisted and biased as anything I've ever read, on par with the KKK's hate-filled literature talking about how blacks (I won't use the actual term they did) will take over the world!

I'm heavily involved in the LGBT community and the fight for equal rights. I can emphatically say that we, as LGBT activist, DON'T WANT TO:

Attack churches
Ban free speech
Ban counseling for kids "confused" by "homosexual" issues (we do want those kids to get counseling if they need it, just by a professional, pro-gay counselor, not some hate-filled pseudoscientific raving religious lunatic who will pump them full of guilt and shame about their sexual orientation which will encourage them to commit suicide).
Promote the "homosexual agenda" in schools (love and acceptance are not an agenda).

We do want to:

Legalize homosexuality (why, other than pure bigotry, should it be illegal? Do you want a society like ISIS Iraq or Uganda?)
promote gay pride parades (the fabulous horror!)
demand non-discrimination laws (again, should we be ISIS Iraq?)
insist on homosexuals' adoption of children (why should only heterosexual couples get to adopt kids? Kids need good parents, and many of those good parents happen to be gay -- get over it!)
[color=fuchsia]Conservapedia propaganda[/color] wrote:The Homosexual Agenda

Joseph P. Gudel, in That Which is Unnatural[3] contended that the homosexual movement,
Unnatural? Homosexuality exists in hundreds of species, homophobia exists in only one.
♥ Haven (she/her) ♥
♥ Kindness is the greatest adventure ♥

Post Reply