gay flag


20-plus reasons to question gay activism . . .

twenty questions


 

    Reason No. 1

      The reality of homosexual recruitment.

    Reason No. 2

      The invention of “sexual orientation.”

    Reason No. 3

      Equation of “sexual orientation” with race.

    Reason No. 4

      Disagreements among homosexuals themselves
      about the nature of homosexual behavior.

    Reason No. 5

      Unproven claims and biased research on
      the biology of homosexuality.

    Reason No. 6

      Use of self-assessments as evidence to the
      nature of homosexual behavior.

    Reason No. 7

      Use of violence and intimidation to force
      acceptance of homosexuality.

    Reason No. 8

      Efforts by homosexuals to obstruct people
      seeking relief from homosexual impulses.

    Reason No. 9

      Promotion of homosexual lifestyles via
      propaganda and sentimentality.

    Reason No. 10

      Invention of homosexual “ethnologies.”

    Reason No. 11

      Conflation of ancient homosexuality with
      modern-day practices.

    Reason No. 12

      Equation of bias against homosexuality
      with other prejudgments; e.g., race, sex,
      and religion.

    Reason No. 13

      The sociologically dysfunctional nature of
      homosexual relationships.

    Reason No. 14

      The moral confusion inherent in homosexual
      lifestyles.

    Reason No. 15

      Spiritual and physical pathologies intrinsic
      to homosexuality.

    Reason No. 16

      The absence of moral courage in the face of
      gay activism.

    Reason No. 17

      The social and individual benefits resulting
      from suppression of homosexuality.

    Reason No. 18

      Questionable “outings” of historical figures.

    Reason No. 19

      Existence of open homosexuality as a motive
      for hatred of America.

    Reason No. 20

      The reduction of objections to homosexuality
      to simply matters of ignorance, bigotry . . .

    Reason No. 21

      The “personal to political” motivation under-
      lying gay activism.

    Reason No. 22

      The worldview implications of embracing
      homosexuality as normal.


    Reason No. 1
    Back to Top

    The reality of homosexual recruitment.

    finger

    If homosexuals are “born not made,” then why do individual homosexuals admit to and engage in recruitment?

    How does the claim that “genuine heterosexuals cannot be recruited into homosexuality” facilitate the mainstreaming of homosexuality into public life?

    How does that notion facilitate exposure of children and young people to what would otherwise be understood as recruitment?

    How does the assertion of “born not made” respond to parental concerns with public school teachers who are openly homosexual?

    How does it justify programs — sometimes mandatory — encouraging young people to question their “gender identity”?

    How does it lead to the establishment of homosexual support groups in schools and the referral of troubled youth to those groups for “help”?


    Reason No. 2
    Back to Top

    The invention of “sexual orientation” as a justification of homosexuality.

    sexual orientation

    Where and why did the idea of “sexual orientation” originate?

    Which of the following aspects of life are part of “sexual orientation”?

    • Cultural?
    • Social?
    • Philosophical?
    • Religious?
    • Educational?
    • Familial?
    • Experiential?
    • Biological?
    • Physiological?
    • Psychological?
    • Moral/ethical?
    • Volitional?

     
    How many “orientations” can be constructed from the preceding factors?

    • Conservative “orientation”?
    • Liberal?
    • Racist?
    • Welfare?
    • Criminal?
    • Gang?
    • Drug?
    • Pedophile?
    • Homosexual?
    • Heterosexual?

     
    Which of the preceding “orientations” are grounded in something really real? Which should be “privileged”? Which might suggest impure motives on the part of those who would assert them?

    What are the dangers of “reification” — of thinking concepts (e.g., “sexual orientation”) produce effects in the real world (e.g., “frotting”).

    Do heterosexuals owe their existence to homosexuality or vice versa?

    How can a homosexual orientation ever be ontologically equivalent to a heterosexual orientation? What part of gay activism is driven by deep-seated intuitions of ontological inferiority? Can social acceptance ever ease those dark intuitions?


    Reason No. 3
    Back to Top

    Equation of “sexual orientation with race.

    equation of sexual orientation with race

    How does the concordance of sexual orientation among pairs of identical twins compare to concordance for drug addiction? What about unwed pregnancy?

    How do twin studies show that homosexuality is not monolithic?

    What evidence do twin studies provide for recognition of an “addiction orientation”? Is concordance for sexual orientation among pairs of identical twins greater or less than a fair coin toss?

    How can twin studies be used to prove sexual orientation is not really real in the same way that race, for example, is real?

    How well do self-reported racial identifications correlate with genetic markers?

    How well do self-reported sexual identities correlate with genetic markers?

    What degree of correlation would be reasonable if sexual orientation were treated like race?

    In light of genetic evidence, why is society so eager to affirm sexual orientation and so wary of affirming race?

    Why is the gay community so lacking in moral authority that it must claim kinship with the civil rights movement in order to make a claim on the conscience of the larger society?

    What are the requisites of moral authority and how does the gay community stack up against those criteria?


    Reason No. 4
    Back to Top

    Disagreements among homosexuals themselves about the nature of homosexual behavior.

    feet

    Is homosexuality a matter of nature or nurture? Chosen or innate?

    Is it something to be celebrated or resisted?

    What ethic governs homosexuality? How does it differ from heterosexual ethics?

    Which form(s) of homosexuality is/are society supposed to accept?


    Reason No. 5
    Back to Top

    Unproven claims and biased research on the biology of homosexuality.

    genetics

    How much of the evidence in favor of a biological basis for homosexuality comes from “advocacy researchers” — i.e., researchers who have prior commitments to justifying homosexuality?

    How much of that evidence has been validated? How much has been shown to be defective?

    Why is such research always aimed at justifying homosexuality rather than curing it?


    Reason No. 6
    Back to Top

    Use of self-assessments as evidence to the nature of homosexual behavior.

    counsel

    How does the human need for a “personal narrative” make self-assessments particularly error-prone?

    What’s the chance of “I’ve always felt this way” actually being true?


    Reason No. 7
    Back to Top

    Use of violence and intimidation to advance mainstream acceptance of homosexuality.

    fists

    Why do gays find violence and intimidation necessary to advance their cause?

    If violence and intimidation are justifiable in advancing gay demands, why aren’t they justifiable in resisting those demands?


    Reason No. 8
    Back to Top

    Efforts by homosexuals to obstruct people seeking relief from homosexual impulses.

    Research

    Should homosexuals be permitted to “come out” in response to the “discovery” of their heterosexuality the same way heterosexuals “come out” as homosexuals?

    If homosexuals can block attempts at changing gender identity, why shouldn’t heterosexuals do the same?

    Why should the change in gender identity from straight to gay always be a “one-way street”?

    How much do we know about the causes, prevention, and cures of homosexuality? How much of that information is suppressed by gay activism?


    Reason No. 9
    Back to Top

    Use of propaganda and sentimentality to promote homosexual lifestyles.

    Snake Oil

    How do gay activists conflate “fact” with “meaning” to promote acceptance of homosexuality?

    Would the discovery of a genetic link (fact) for homosexuality necessarily imply (mean) that homosexuality is normal and should be accepted?

    How many people know about Matthew Shepard? How about Jesse Dirkheiser?


    Reason No. 10
    Back to Top

    Invention of “ethnologies” to give homosexuality cultural status.

    Diversity

    Does homosexuality really have an ethnology or has it simply existed on the margins of many cultures?

    Does heterosexuality have an ethnology? What about celibacy?


    Reason No. 11
    Back to Top

    Conflation of ancient homosexuality with modern-day practices.

    Greek Man and Boy

    How does ancient Greek and Roman homosexuality compare with present-day sensibilities toward same-sex sexuality?

    In light of differences, how can ancient practices be used to justify present-day behavior?


    Reason No. 12
    Back to Top

    Equation of bias against homosexuality with other prejudgments; e.g., race, sex, and religion.

    Ethnic

    Is homosexuality like religion and subject to change?

    Is homosexuality like race and morally neutral?

    Or is homosexuality fraught with moral implications– like the fact of being male or female?

    If so, what are those implications?


    Reason No. 13
    Back to Top

    The sociologically dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships.

    Boat

    Will the channeling of male sexuality into monogamous heterosexual unions unravel in response to the legitimation of same-sex sexuality?

    How can a decline in the status of women and children be avoided in the face of that unraveling?


    Reason No. 14
    Back to Top

    The moral confusion inherent in homosexual lifestyles.

    When is a “peeper” not a peeper? ANSWER: When the man in question dresses as a woman and claims the right to use the ladies dressing room.

    Goodbye

    Since gay sexuality has nothing to do with procreation or child-rearing, how can homosexual morality escape being either (1) a caricature of heterosexual morality (e.g., gay marriage) or (2) its negation (promiscuity)?

    In terms of virtue, how do we know a “good gay” when we see one. If the virtue of a horse is in its swiftness and the virtue of a knife is in its sharpness, what is the virtue of a gay? What is the “telos” (end or design) of gayness?

    How can gay communities stigmatize bad behavior within their own communities without being guilty of the same hate speech of which they accuse heterosexuals?

    On what grounds can the gay community make a claim on the conscience of individuals or society at large?

    What offense to moral sensibilities does the “AIDS Quilt” represent?

    Do gay activists take responsibility for the hundreds of thousands of deaths their agitation caused during the early days of the AIDS virus?

    Why do gays “out” their own against the wishes of their victims?

    Why have we changed from (1) a society that used to protect children against exposure to homosexuality to (2) one that now confers children on gay couples in order to legitimate same-sex relationships?

    Do homosexual marriages give or receive legitimacy through adoption of children? What about heterosexual marriages?


    Reason No. 15
    Back to Top

    Spiritual and physical pathologies intrinsic to homosexuality.

    Problems

    Should the costs of gay lifestyles (financial and otherwise) be shifted to the general population? Or should gays bear the full consequences of their behavior?

    Would such a shift put the prosperity of the larger society at risk?

    How is the public good served by making gay lifestyles more attractive and accessible?


    Reason No. 16
    Back to Top

    The apparent lack of moral courage in those who are silent in the face of gay advocacy.

    Courage

    But first . . .

    Is moral courage even possible without moral clarity?

    Do gay advocates seek moral clarity? Or rather a different morality?


    Reason No. 17
    Back to Top

    The social and individual benefits resulting from suppression of homosexuality.

    No Gays

    Do people experiencing same-sex attraction live longer, healthier lives in a society that suppresses homosexual behavior or in one that encourages it?

    Does a society promote life and health by suppressing same-sex sexuality or by encouraging it?

    If equality of real money with play money wipes out the value of money for everyone (counterfeiters included), then why wouldn’t the equality of gay marriage with heterosexual marriage likewise wipe out the meaning of marriage for gays and non-gays alike?

    Do humans have natural affections, negative and positive? Do natural affections motivate uncivil responses to homosexuality? Can uncivil reactions be eliminated without undermining natural affections? How does the suppression of homosexuality simultaneously prevent abuse of natural affections AND abuse of homosexuals?


    Reason No. 18
    Back to Top

    Questionable “outings” of historical figures to make homosexuality appear respectable.

    Famous

    Was the Apostle Paul a closet homosexual because he spoke against same-sex sexuality?

    Was Jesus bisexual because he loved both Mary and Martha along with their brother Lazarus?

    Who could not be “outed” based on such reasoning?


    Reason No. 19
    Back to Top

    Existence of open homosexuality as a motive for hatred of America.

    coming out and terror

    Do radical Islamists use the openness of homosexuality in America as a recruitment tool?

    What aspect of American life most effectively prevents moderate Muslims from speaking out in defense of America?


    Reason No. 20
    Back to Top

    The reduction of objections to homosexuality to simply matters of ignorance, bigotry . . .

    Ignorant

    Is name calling on the part of gay activists a dodge to avoid legitimate questions?

    Is criticism of same-sex sexuality hate speech?

    If gays claim to “embody” homosexuality as part of their “nature,” how can opponents separate aversion to (1) the “notion” of homosexuality from (2) the “people” who engage in homosexual behavior?

    Should the conflation of (1) “ideas” with (2) “persons” be challenged as a disingenuous way of shielding questionable ideas and questionable behavior from critique?


    Reason No. 21
    Back to Top

    The “personal to political” motivation underlying gay activism.

    Closet

    Does the heedlessness of same-sex sexuality inspire confidence gay activists are seeking the public good in “going public”?

    What part does a guilty conscience play in gay activism?

    Are gays willing to put innocent people at risk to gain what they want? What about calls for eliminating restrictions on blood donations? What about the forcible “outing” of homosexuals by other homosexuals? What about demands for ending “don’t ask, don’t tell” regardless of impact on national security?

    What about unwillingness to “go public” when it comes to public health?


    Reason No. 22
    Back to Top

    The worldview implications of embracing homosexuality as normal.

    Worldview

    In terms of worldview . . .

      NATURE OF HUMANITY:
      Do manhood and womanhood have essential natures and hence essential virtues?

      NATURE OF HISTORY:
      Is history being re-written to justify a modern-day ideology of same-sex attraction?

      NATURE OF ULTIMATE REALITY:
      Is ultimate reality itself by nature homophobic?


    SOME FINAL QUESTIONS:

    How much of the preceding content is religious in nature? Homophobic? Or more pointedly, how much is grounded in common-sense reservations about hasty acceptance of lifestyles that raise so many unanswered questions?

    Is American society more likely to indulge homosexuality or oppress it? If oppress, then why are gay activists exempted from conventional critique?

    And finally, does gay activism deserve the indulgence of having its dogmas go unchallenged? Or does it have a lot of answering to do?


    — historeo.com

    historeo.comhistoreo 2

    “Position Statement on Same-Sex Sexuality” pdf format

    “20 Reasons to Question the Gay Agenda” pdf format

    Updated and re-posted from 30 Sep 2011

    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

9 visitors online now
3 guests, 6 bots, 0 members
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: