Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia
The size of this file (plae118.htm) is approximately 143Kb.
|Chapter 117||Table of Contents||Index||Chapter 119|
Some of this document's coding (e.g., bold, italics, and underlining) has been lost in the conversion process. Italics have been replaced with "less than" ( < ) and "greater than" ( > ) symbols; footnote numbers are bracketed thus: .
In all probability, tables and columnar data will not display properly. For any chance at seeing this data correctly, view it using a non-proportional font.
"You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won."
- Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, The Overhauling of Straight America.
Warning! WARNING! Warning! WARNING! Warning! WARNING!
Some of the material described in this chapter is extremely offensive in nature.
"The religious extremists will make us fight every step of the way. But they've already lost. We have made gay and lesbian rights a legitimate cause for people in public life."
- Rand Schrader, openly homosexual appointee to the Los Angeles Municipal Court.1
We Gays are a gentle but angry people. The government and the Right Wing - and especially the reactionary churches - are guilty of AIDS genocide, because they will not identify with and support our reasonable demands.
Since our lives are at stake, we are entirely justified in employing whatever tactics we choose. No matter what we do, nothing is worse than the genocide being committed against us!
Full Equality? Homosexual activists say that all they want full equality with "straights."
Chapter 117, "Homosexual Objectives," reveals that the truth is far different. There really is a "homosexual agenda," despite the homosexual sneers that such a term will inevitably elicit, and it demands much more than equality: It demands special privileges that no sane person would grant to any other special interest group. The primary thinkers of the "gay rights" movement are thinking of a true social revolution that will result in what they call a "queer planet."
In a nutshell, homosexuals want to be declared a special and privileged class of people that is free of all responsibility for its actions.
In order to achieve this ultimate goal, the homosexuals depend upon three primary strategies (as distinct from tactics, which are day-to-day methods); absolute privacy, the victim status, and force of law, as described in the following paragraphs.
Strategy 1: Absolute Privacy. The first (and most dominant) of the homosexual strategies is the achievement of absolute privacy.
Privacy is essential for all immoral activities, particularly those involving illicit sex: Homosexuality, adultery, incest, fornication, child molestation, rape, abortion, and pornography. If the public learns about the true nature of the homosexuals, and about their repulsive activities (and the extreme dangers and degree of irresponsibility that they represent), promiscuous homosexuals would be forced to return en masse to the well-deserved position of outcast and anathema that they traditionally have occupied.
Strategy 2: Victim Status. The second general strategy employed by homosexual activists is the victim status. The only way that the homosexuals can advance their agenda is to plead for tolerance and take advantage of sympathy generated by constant reference to imaginary "atrocities" committed against "gays" throughout history. They therefore appeal to the "rescuer" in all of us.
Ironically, the AIDS epidemic contributed more to the perception of this victim status than any other influence in the history of the homosexual movement. The biggest oppressor of the homosexual is himself.
The background and mechanics of the victim status are discussed in Chapter 9 of Volume I.
Strategy 3: Force of Law. The homosexuals have stated that they want nothing less than full equality with heterosexuals. However, their tactics have shown that they are now taking advantage of public sympathy to gain not only equality, but a privileged position in society, essentially protected from all responsibility and criticism by the full force of law.
There are literally thousands of examples that illustrate how homosexuals use their "special rights" to force others to accept their perversions. Many of these examples are outlined in Chapter 9 of Volume I, "The Victim Status."
Typical episodes (both individual and institutional) are described later in this chapter.
Brains or Hate? Homosexuals as a class appear to be aristocratic and smart; however, this is a bright and shallow forced intelligence. It is desperation, hate and anger masquerading as brains.
As with the Neofeminists, a large portion of the homosexual's constructive brain power seems preoccupied with thinking up cute acronyms for their organizations: DORIS (Defending Our Rights in the Streets), SQUASH (Super Queers United Against Savage Heterosexuals); VOGUE (Valiant Out Gays United in Energy); GHOST (Grand Homosexual Organization to Stop Televangelists); LABIA (Lesbians and Bisexuals in Action); QUEST (Queers Undertaking Exquisite and Symbolic Transformation); and GRINCH (Gay Retaliation for Inexcusable Negligence and Criminal Homophobia), among many others.2
Out of necessity, the homosexuals have become excellent strategists, as demonstrated by their many victories in the legal and public arenas. However, their high-visibility members, including the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), RATS (Radical Activist Truth Squad), the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, Dykes on Bikes, organized transvestites and transsexuals, and the many homosexual child molesters, are beginning to attract a little too much public attention. Therefore, the "Gay Napoleons" are mapping out a new, more sedate, but very sophisticated campaign whose objective is to subtly "desensitize" the American public to their hideous practices.
The Overall Strategy. The homosexuals' new strategy is very compactly and clearly laid out in the "marching orders" of the movement, The Overhauling of Straight America, written by homosexuals Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill. This comprehensive homosexual strategy was first outlined in a condensed version in Volume 8, Number 11 of Christopher Street, and the October and November 1987 issues of Guide Magazine, a homosexual monthly.
This material served as the heart of a book that the authors eventually published, and represents an absolute treasure chest of information for those Christian activists who are fighting the radical homosexual agenda. It is said that generals and attorneys fervently wish that their opponents would write a book.
The so-called "gay rights" movement has fulfilled this wish by making vital information on their strategies available to the public. This is a grave (and hopefully fatal) strategic error.
The seven primary tactics used by the modern homosexual-rights movement are listed below in approximate order of their importance. Keep in mind the difference between strategies - the overall, long-term plan - and tactics, which are day-to-day methods used to support the strategies. The anti-"gay rights" activist must be intimately familiar with all of these tactics, because he will encounter all of them and will have them used against him.
In order to effectively counter and defeat the tactics used by homosexuals, every Christian who actively opposes the homosexual agenda must know the enemy and how he operates.
Exploit the victim status
Use the Neoliberal media
Confuse and neutralize the churches
Slander and stereotype Christians
Bait and switch (hide true nature)
Intimidate through violence and vandalism
Abuse the political process
The extracts that are listed in the following paragraphs are copied verbatim from Kirk and Pill's The Overhauling of Straight America, and are followed by comments and examples that analyze the tactics and show just how successful the homosexual's campaign has been.
Homosexual Tactic #1:
Exploit the Victim Status
Statement of the Tactic
The "Victim Status" is not only a strategy used at the highest levels to gain sympathy for "gay rights" as a movement, it is a very valuable and powerful tactic that is frequently used in day-to-day clashes with normal people.
Kirk and Pill summarize the potent and lethal effectiveness of the victim status in their book, as described below;
"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector ... Jaunty mustachioed musclemen would keep a very low profile in gay commercials and other public presentations, while sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured (it goes without saying that groups on the farthest margin of acceptability, such as NAMBLA [the North American Man-Boy Love Association], must play no part at all in such a campaign: Suspected child-molesters will never look like victims.
"Now, there are two different messages about the Gay Victim that are worth communicating. First, the mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference. The message must read: 'As far as gays can tell, they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or white or black or bright or athletic ... they are not morally blameworthy.'
"Straight viewers must be able to identify with gays as victims ... To this end, the persons featured in the public campaign should be decent and upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards ... spokesman for our cause must be R-type 'straight gays' rather than Q-type 'homosexuals on display'" [emphasis added].
Analysis of the Tactic. Notice the extraordinary similarity to the tactics used by the Neofeminist movement. Neatly tailored women attorneys are the stormtroopers who have made all the pro-abortion gains in court: Not snarling, loud, Neofeminists. The Neofeminists snivel incessantly that they are the victims of "misogyny," and that any person who opposes their agenda simply hates all women.
In a similar vein, homosexual activists are compelled to be free of responsibility for their actions, so they blame everyone else for their troubles and their many hideous diseases. Of course, they never mention the bathhouse owners in New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, where homosexuals can still congregate for anonymous group sex at any time. They never talk about the "glory hole" guides they publish, which list thousands of places where (I am not making this up), homosexuals have drilled holes in restroom stall walls so that they can commit oral sex (fellatio) on one other anonymously. We never hear about "Patient Zero," the airline steward who initiated the AIDS epidemic in this country by intentionally infecting partners at such bathhouses until his death, under the cloak of legally-enforced privacy; in fact, there is no reference whatever to any homosexual responsibility at all for AIDS (the activities of "Patient Zero" are described further in Chapter 122, "Homosexuality and AIDS").
And they never mention that homosexual activists even tried to stop blood screening for AIDS in 1983 on the grounds that it was, according to the lofty opinion of the National Gay Task Force (NGTF), "scapegoating" and "stigmatizing!"3 Incredibly, a blood bank still collects blood in the Castro District of San Francisco, which has the highest density of AIDS carriers in the country, in order not to offend homosexuals.
The "special rights" situation has become ludicrously unbalanced in many parts of the country. Homosexuals can storm churches and assault parishioners without being charged with any crime whatsoever. However, let anyone dare to even physically defend himself against violent attack, and he is instantly charged with a "hate crime," and will suffer severe penalties under the law.
This is one excellent example of how the homosexuals have worked to achieve special rights, because any crime directed against them is automatically considered far more serious than the same crime directed against anyone else.
Many such "hate crimes," of course, are trumped up or entirely bogus. One organization that collects and analyzes incidents of so-called "hate crimes" is;
The Hoaxer Project
Editorial Research Service
Post Office Box 2047
Olathe, Kansas 66061
Telephone: (913) 829-0609
The "Hoaxer Project" will mail documentation on a wide range of bogus hate crimes to inquirers for $6.95.
The `Ryan White' Maneuver. Ryan White was almost too good to be true for the homosexuals. White, who was middle-class with innocent good looks, had all of the attributes required by the homopropagandists, including the most important feature of all - he really was an AIDS "victim," having contracted the disease from a blood transfusion.
He was, in other words, a person that people in the `straight' world could immediately identify with.
When White died in early 1990, the homosexuals beat their breasts and groaned loudly in mock sorrow, marched in parades wearing T-shirts that shouted "REMEMBER RYAN WHITE," and, in general, tried to pass themselves off as victims too. It was revoltingly obvious to even the most undiscerning observer that the homosexuals couldn't care less about Ryan White - they were merely using him as a media tool. No homosexual group lifted a finger to help him or his family while he was dying of the disease, but, of course, there was a great outpouring of crocodile tears once he was gone.
The homosexuals also rely heavily on images of newborns who, through no fault of their own, have contracted AIDS from infected mothers. What they fail to point out, of course, is that AIDS victims under 19 years of age comprise less than two percent of all people with AIDS.4
Christopher H. Foreman, a political analyst with the Brookings Foundation, says that the homosexual demand for unlimited AIDS money constitutes "A remarkably successful lobby. In an era of diminished budgetary resources, many other things in the public health sector will not get money."3
Foreman is correct. The Federal government today spends more money on AIDS research than on all heart diseases and all cancers combined, despite the fact that twenty times more people die of heart disease and cancer than die of AIDS!
The homosexuals will literally terrorize anyone who does not do exactly what they demand. When a certain city health commissioner revised his estimate of local AIDS cases downward, ACT-UP immediately attacked him and staged intense harassment at his home for months, because local appropriations for AIDS dropped marginally as a result.5
It is about time that normal people stood up and shouted "NO MORE!" We cannot let ourselves be moved to pity by a group of people who would like to sanitize and legitimize their objectives of the genocide of morality, perverted sex, and total irresponsibility.
Gettin' Over. Homosexuals know when to press their advantage, and they have certainly exploited the victim status for all it is worth.
In current society, homosexuals can ruthlessly stereotype and ridicule `straights,' and it is considered justifiable because, after all, heterosexuals are guilty of "AIDS genocide." But let a straight comedian like the Diceman make fun of homosexuals, and MTV bans him for life.
Under this system, when a "straight" calls a homosexual a "queer" or "faggot," he is prosecuted because he has committed a Federally-classified "hate crime." However, when homosexuals attack St. Patrick's Cathedral, assault its parishioners, and desecrate the consecrated Host, they are, according to local politicians, merely "expressing justifiable outrage." And they are sentenced to a few hours of community service (that they naturally never perform) by a "judge" who compares them to Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King.
The following paragraphs describe a number of situations where homosexuals have used the victim status to suppress opposition and attack their opponents. Since the victim status is so important, and since it is the tactic most likely to be encountered by the anti-"gay rights" activist in everyday conflict with the homosexuals, a fairly large number of examples are described below.
Hate Crime Statistics. Perhaps the most common lament of the garden-variety homosexual revolves around the alleged "tidal wave" of "anti-gay" hate crimes that are occurring in this country.
The press obediently trumpets the claim that "hate crimes against gays" are increasing at the astronomical rate of 20 percent (30 percent, 50 percent, pick a number) each year, and this is supposed to galvanize progressive "straights" into taking action to protect their persecuted brethren.
If the media and progressives would take the time to check the figures, they would find that the reality surrounding "hate crimes" is far different than what the homopropagandists would like us to believe.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) statistics show that there were 4,558 documented hate crimes in 1991 nationwide. However, only 2,771 of the 16,100 law enforcement agencies participating in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports program reported such crimes. Therefore, the number of hate crimes actually committed in this country is probably closer to the number that would result if all law enforcement agencies reported, i.e.,
(16,100/2,771) x 4,558 = 26,500.
Using the FBI's ratios, all hate crimes would be broken out by category as shown below.
National Breakdown of Hate/Bias Crimes in 1991
Type of Crime
|Other hate/bias crimes||
|Total Hate Crimes||
Reference. "Hatred By the Numbers." The Oregonian, January 11, 1993, page B6.
There are several fascinating conclusions that can be drawn from these numbers, as shown below.
* Conclusion #1: Only Two Percent of Homosexuals Are Ever Victims of Hate Crimes. Homosexual propagandists claim that ten percent of the American population is homosexual. Accepting the homosexual claim that only one-quarter of all bias crimes against homosexuals are reported, this means that the probability of any particular homosexual becoming victimized by a reported or unreported bias crime in any one year is (1,590 X 4)/(25.5 million) = one in 4,000. The chances of a homosexual living his entire 75-year lifespan without being victimized by a bias crime are therefore 98 percent. In other words, only one in 50 homosexuals is ever a victim of a bias crime!
* Conclusion #2: Anti-Religious Hate Crimes Are More Prevalent. The above figures show that there are more than three times as many hate crimes committed against people because of their religion than there are due to anti-homosexual bias. Many of these `hate crimes' are committed by the homosexuals themselves - one obvious example being the repeated violent homosexual attacks on New York's St. Patricks Cathedral, as described later in this chapter.
* Conclusion #3: Homosexuals Commit More Hate Crimes. As shown above, six percent of bias crimes are committed against homosexuals, and three percent of bias crimes are committed against heterosexuals. Crimes by homosexuals against homosexuals and crimes by heterosexuals against heterosexuals are not officially classified as bias crimes. Accepting the homosexual claim that "ten percent of the American population is gay," this means that homosexuals are
(3%/10%)/(6%/90%) = 4.5 times more likely to commit a hate crime against a normal person than vice-versa.
If we accept the more realistic representation of the `gay' population at two percent of the total, this means that homosexuals are
(3%/2%)/(6%/98%) = 25 times more likely to commit a hate crime against a normal person than vice-versa!
* Conclusion #4: Comparative Victim Ratios. The United States population in 1991 was about 255 million. 13.3 percent of our nation is Black, or about 34 million, and 75 percent of the population (about 192 million) is White.6 The homosexual propagandists claim 10 percent, or 25.5 million.
This means that Black people are (0.35/34)/ (0.06/25.5) = 4.4 times more likely to be victims of hate crimes in any one year than are homosexuals.
A Phony "Fourfer:" Azalea Cooley. In the Fall of 1992, Oregonians witnessed perhaps the most vicious political campaign ever waged in this country. The Oregon Citizens Alliance, a conservative group opposing special rights for homosexuals, placed a ballot measure before the people which would declare homosexuality "abnormal and perverse."
The reaction to this ballot measure was wholly predictable: Almost every political, religious, fraternal, and business organization in the State of Oregon condemned the measure as "hateful," "bigoted," "ignorant," "mean-spirited," and every other nasty adjective in the book. Vandalism, death threats, and slander were typical tactics used by those opposing the ballot measure.
One of the most powerful tools used by the homophiles was the allegation that "hate crimes" were on the increase as a direct result of Ballot Measure 9. The "No On Hate" Campaign claimed that the ballot measure had led to a 23% increase in hate crimes in the single year between 1991 and 1992.7
The most powerful spokesperson for the "No on Hate" Campaign emerged in the person of crippled Black lesbian Azalea Cooley, a "quadruple victim" in the homosexual's eyes (female, minority, handicapped, homosexual). Cooley made dozens of speeches before large crowds, displaying prominently a foam board listing all of the more than twenty "hate crimes" that had been directed towards her, including death threats, cross burnings, vandalism, and the like.
The day before the 1992 elections, a police surveillance team filmed Cooley briskly stepping past her wheelchair, walking into her front yard, and setting up a cross for burning. Less than two weeks later, Cooley not only admitted to staging all of the hate crimes herself, but confessed that she was not really crippled after all. Her wheelchair was just a prop. She had shaved her head to make it look like her hair had all fallen out as a result of chemotherapy for an alleged brain cancer. Additionally, the seizures that conveniently gripped her whenever someone asked her uncomfortable questions were faked.
She then clumsily (and ineffectively) attempted suicide in order to try to get even more sympathy and claimed that she was "just sick and looking for attention." Finally (apparently secure in the belief that Oregonians have IQs two points above broccoli) she strongly asserted that her activities had no political purpose whatsoever!7
Yet the homosexuals did not disavow Cooley's activities - they expressed sympathy towards her instead and staged the usual outpouring of phony emotion so that they would look good to the public. Predictably, there was absolutely no condemnation from the press.
If an Oregon Citizens Alliance member had staged such hate crimes, not only wouldn't the press have cared, it would have probably called for a jail term if he had been caught in the process.
The 22 hate crimes committed by Cooley against herself are still listed by Oregon homosexual groups.
Other Oregon Homosexual Lies. The second most talked-about "hate crime" in Oregon during the Ballot Measure 9 fight also turned out to be bogus. Salem residents Hattie Mae Cohens and Brian Mock, both open homosexuals, were killed when their Salem home was firebombed in September of 1992. The underground press and homosexual organizations once again accused the Oregon Citizens Alliance of "fostering hate," and once again, the anti-9 forces did not bother to do any investigation or checking of the facts.
Sean R. Edwards, 21, eventually admitted to committing the murders, noting that he had been drinking for nine hours before the incident and that Cohens and Mock were not his intended victims. Edwards said that his motive for the firebombing was anger over an earlier assault.8
These were not the only instances of bogus hate crimes fabricated by Oregon homosexuals during the Ballot Measure 9 campaign.
The third most talked-about "hate crime" during this time involved a `straight' opponent of Measure 9. According to Donna Red Wing of the Lesbian Community Project, because of her political views on homosexuality, Cindy Patterson of Klamath Falls was forced to move out of her home; her car was sabotaged; her children were harassed; her horses were poisoned; and her prized mare was viciously attacked by thugs armed with pitchforks who inflicted severe injuries on the animal.
But Patterson denied most of what Red Wing said, claiming that she only owned one horse; and Klamath County officials said that this animal had never been attacked, and that Patterson had never reported any crimes committed against her at all.
In all, the Lesbian Community Project reported 970 "bias crimes" in Oregon during 1992; the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force reported even more at 1,176; but the Oregon Department of Justice compiled just 95, and the Portland Police Bureau recorded 146.
Yet all major Oregon newspapers and television and radio stations accepted Red Wing's statistics over those of government agencies without question. Even the New York Times reported that more homosexuals were attacked in Oregon in 1992 than in New York, a state with 15 times as many people.
Naturally, Red Wing adamantly refused to release any backup documents to substantiate her claims - to include even crime reports that had the alleged `victim's' names obliterated, which is common practice for law enforcement agencies and other organizations that compile crime statistics. When reporters called her to inquire about her statistics, Red Wing simply replied that "I don't want to talk to you."9
The tactic used by Red Wing and other homosexuals is identical to that used by pro-abortionists with their "Silent No More" sob stories about female relatives who were butchered by illegal abortions in the `bad old days' before Roe v. Wade. Such stories are always centered around anonymous women, and the storytellers invariably refuse to identify the `victim.' The Hemlock Society also used the same `privacy cloak' tactic in 1988 when it burned the individual responses to its poll that allegedly `showed' that 79 percent of all California doctors support active euthanasia.10
There are two primary reasons why the Lesbian Community Project and National
Gay & Lesbian Task Force "bias crime" figures are grossly inflated;
Even the official government figures on the numbers of "bias crimes" shown above are probably grossly inflated, because all Oregon government agencies have a supersensitivity to any act that homosexuals do not like. For example, the Portland Police Bureau treated pro-Ballot Measure 9 literature left randomly on homosexual's windshields as part of a saturation campaign as "bias crimes." The "type of crime committed" space on one Bureau report was filled in with the word "Information."9
In summary, the point of all of these examples is quite clear: All anti-lifers, whether they be `sexologists,' pro-abortionists, homosexuals, or euthanasiasts, will grossly inflate statistics and lie repeatedly in order to gain public sympathy, and then will hide whatever scanty documentation they have when questioned. Pro-life and pro-family activists should vigorously call into question all statistics presented by pro-aborts and homophiles, because their numbers are in all probability completely false.
Rooney's "Blooper." For anti-lifers, the treasured victim status is much more than a ceremonial title. It is a formidable weapon that allows "victims" to use brute force in order to accomplish objectives by simply sidestepping the usual social "rules of play." In other words, "victims" see life as TEGWAR - The Exciting Game Without Any Rules. And those people who are unfortunate enough to get in the way are simply crushed.
Radio personality Andy Rooney found out firsthand that the rights of free speech and association have been discarded in favor of politically correct (P.C.) views.
In 1990, Rooney had the audacity to suggest that sodomy and cigarette smoking might be unhealthy. After outraged homosexuals attacked him on every available public front, The Wall Street Journal voiced its disapproval of this new brand of McCarthyism as it editorialized that "Certain offenses, those of racism and homophobia in particular, now have such status that it is necessary only to be accused of them to be found guilty or at least irremediably tainted ... Today, the universities and the academies are the main perpetrators of thought control and repression - places where even small deviations from the established orthodoxies on women, homosexuality or race bring instant retribution and threats to job security."11
Naturally, if a Neoliberal favorite makes a truly racist statement, he is excused by his peers for having suffered "just an uncharacteristic slip of the tongue" or "a momentary lapse in judgment." In 1982, CBS correspondent Mike Wallace, who has relentlessly ridiculed conservative beliefs, commented on the difficulty Blacks and Hispanics had in understanding complex sales contracts. Wallace said that "You bet your ass they [the contracts] are hard to read ... if you're reading them over watermelon and tacos."12
Not a murmur was heard from Neoliberal groups or from Wallace's fellow journalists after this grossly racist statement. Contrast this to the treatment that Rooney received, and the Neoliberal double-standard is highlighted once again.
Coercion in Connecticut. In 1991, the Connecticut House debated a bill that is fairly typical of "gay rights" legislation that is cropping up with greater and greater frequency all over the country. The intent of such legislation is to force the public to accept homosexuality. The homosexuals do not deny this, nor do they deny that such laws would be a gross violation of freedom of religion, speech, and even thought.
These concerns simply do not matter to them.
The Connecticut bill was entitled "An Act Concerning Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation." Under this law, those persons who dared to publicly condemn homosexuality (say a pastor during a sermon or a person making an anti-"gay" joke at a party) would be jailed for a month, and those landlords who refused to rent to practicing homosexuals would be fined $50,000.13
Hypocrisy Personified. While they aggressively lobby for such Draconian measures, homosexuals display their hypocrisy by contemptuously referring to their normal male counterparts as "breeders."14
Anyone who believes the myth of homosexual tolerance and gentleness should read Michael Swift's essay in Chapter 117. In one short page he refers to normal people as "feeble," "vulgar," "vicious," "cowardly," "puny," "superficial," "sentimental," "cheap," "insipid," "juvenile," "weaklings," "liars," "hypocrites," "traitors," "stupid," "dumb," and "swine."
As another example of homosexual bigotry, there were three restrooms at the now-defunct homosexual publication Outweek Magazine labeled "Fags," "Dykes," and "Other."15
These terms are meant to be every bit as derogatory and sneering as the word "faggot," but no Neoliberal politician would even dream of suggesting that any homosexual who called a normal person a "breeder" be fined $50,000.
Religious Beliefs Mean Nothing. In a classic confrontation between an official "oppressor" and an official "victim class," Georgetown University, a Catholic college, was forced by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to grant privileges to a homosexual campus organization. Nan Hunter of the Lesbian and Gay Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hailed the ruling as "a milestone."16
What this ruling means is that a special interest group may bring the power of the State to bear on a private, non-Federally funded religious college to accept a group whose very purpose is to advocate practices that are anathema to the religion of the college itself.
Movin' Out at the U of W. Ann Hacklander, Maureen Reed, and Cari Sprague were roommates at a Madison, Wisconsin apartment. When Sprague informed her roommates that she was homosexual, Hacklander and Reed told her that such conduct was offensive to them and asked her to move out. They did not force her to leave; they simply asked her to go.
Sprague immediately filed a grievance with the local Equal Opportunity Commission, which hauled in Hacklander and Reed and mercilessly grilled them for two hours, reducing them to tears. They were finally pressured into accepting a four-year agreement that had them; (1) pay Sprague $1,500 in "damages" (which were, of course, never specified); (2) write Sprague an "acceptable" (i.e., suitably groveling) letter of apology; (3) attend "sensitivity training sessions" conducted by radical homosexuals, and (4) have the Commission monitor their housing arrangements for two years.17
Many colleges now assign students randomly and allow homosexuals to remove their straight roommates - but not vice-versa. It goes without saying that, if the above situation were reversed and Sprague was the lone "straight" who had been asked to leave, she would have absolutely no legal recourse whatever.
Eradicating `Homophobia' the Neoliberal Way. The University of Wisconsin is certainly not alone in its supersensitivity to alleged offenses against homosexuals. More than 70 percent of this country's colleges and universities now possess codes of conduct that ban behavior and speech based upon racism, sexism, and, many times, "homophobia."
The danger that these codes represent to the free discussion of ideas far outweighs their usefulness. This has already been demonstrated, because several colleges have severely punished students for merely wanting to debate the topic of homosexuality.
A student at the University of Michigan expressed his opinion that homosexuality was a disease and announced his intention to establish a counseling program to help homosexuals leave that lifestyle. He was dragged before a panel of university administrators, unanimously found guilty of "sexual harassment," and was thrown out of the university.
And a Yale student met the same fate after he merely posted a notice of a debate about whether or not the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA's) policy of discriminating against homosexuals was legitimate.18
Political science professor Jean Betheke Elshtain, while highlighting the dangers presented by codes against racism, also points out the difficulties associated with all punitive codes of this nature; "My hunch is that, over the long haul, the upshot of such endeavors [college speech codes] will not be a purified, racist-free, collective student consciousness, but a simmering backlog of resentment at being labeled as a racist, even if one has never committed a racist act or uttered a racist slur."19
As the American Civil Liberties Union commonly asserts, if unpopular ideas are banned today, the more popular ones will inevitably be banned in the future.
Homosexuals and Academic Freedom. It is exceedingly dangerous to one's academic career to dare to oppose the campus gay student associations (GSAs) in any way. Teresa Polenz of Dartmouth learned this lesson the hard way.
She attended an April 29, 1984 meeting of the Dartmouth GSA as a reporter for The Dartmouth Review in order to try to find out what the organization did with the tax-free $500 it received from the college every year. This money was extracted from tuition and Dartmouth alumni contributions, so the Review felt that accountability was in order.
A homosexual student, in a rare moment of honesty, revealed how the money was put to use: "We have parties. Wait until you see our parties."20
The day after the meeting, Dean Edward Shanahan of the school told Polenz if she were not in his office in 15 minutes, she would be suspended. Shanahan demanded that she sign a sworn affidavit stating that nothing that happened at the meeting would be published in the Review.
She refused, and so the college moved to put her on trial for "eavesdropping," even though she had openly attended the homosexual meeting. The college gave her no right to call or cross-examine witnesses and no right to a lawyer; and, even more incredibly, the prosecution was given the right to act as judge in the case! In other words, this was a Dartmouth homosexual Kangaroo Kourt. Administrators told her that suspension was a foregone conclusion.
The only thing that saved Polenz was a blistering assault by The Wall Street Journal on the Dartmouth "justice system."21
Remember that Neoliberal skulduggery can only be accomplished in privacy; shining the light of publicity on their activities makes them melt back into the decaying moral ooze from whence they came.
You Ain't Gonna Believe This ... Since homosexuals possess not the slightest vestige of self-control, they automatically push the limits of their "victim status" to the extreme with antics that would be hilariously funny if they were not so incredibly pitiable.
Even transvestites ("cross-dressers" in PC parlance), are going mainstream, riding the `dresstails' of other homosexuals who have "got it made."
What must normal people think when hundreds of TVs descend upon their towns for major conventions such as the one held by "BE ALL" at the Pittsburgh Hotel Sheraton from June 6 to June 10, 1990, and by The Tiffany Club of New England at the exclusive Boatslip Beach Club of Provincetown, Massachusetts, from May 29 to June 4, 1990? These gatherings attract hundreds of TVs and feature workshops, manicurists, hairdressers, `makeup artists,' and clothiers specializing in making women's clothes that fit men's bodies. There are also "Big Sister" programs where experienced TVs help out new ones.22
`Mainstream' homosexual publications often discuss the unique difficulties experienced by transvestites, such as covering over five-o'clock shadow and (this is not a joke, although it should be) how the members of a transvestite water-skiing club can keep their wigs on and prevent them from sinking to the bottom of the river if they do come off!
What Happens When They Get Their Way. What happens when "gay rights" laws pass? What happens when homosexuals have free rein and the "victim status" is written into law? Following are a few examples.
The Conclusion. The "victim status" has allowed our society to devolve to the point where merely muttering "fag" in the presence of a drag queen is a Federal hate crime, but homosexual attacks upon churches as described above are not only tolerated but even encouraged by some government agencies.
Meanwhile, the full force of the Federal and state governments is arrayed against neo-Nazis who primarily march in the streets and hold mini-conventions. It is interesting to speculate as to what would happen to these neo-Nazi groups if they assembled their members by the thousands and began to physically attack Jewish synagogues in the same manner that homosexuals have attacked Catholic churches.
This little exercise in logic leads one to question the now-obsolete slogan "equal justice for all."
Statement of the Tactic
Kirk and Pill recognize the absolute necessity of having the liberal media in the homosexual camp, as outlined below.
"The first order of business is the desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion ... At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing else ... You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won ... Gays as a class must cease to appear mysterious, alien, loathsome, and contrary ... A large-scale media campaign will be required in order to change the image of gays in America.
"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible. The principle behind this advice is simple: Almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters ... As long as Joe Sixpack feels little pressure to perform likewise, he soon gets used to it and life goes on ... Constant talk builds the impression that public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizable segment even practices homosexuality.
"And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent - and only later his unsightly derriere!
"Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in Western civilization. The average American household watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed ... So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream" [emphasis added].
Analysis of the Tactic. Note the use of incrementalism as the homosexuals interestingly use the appropriate image of a camel's "unsightly derriere" to describe their more repulsive practices. Note also that they rely very heavily on the media, which has always been their closest friend. For a more detailed description of how the media works hand in glove with the homosexual movement, and how it relentlessly advances its agenda, read Chapter 127, "Media Pro-Homosexual Bias."
Not only do homosexuals try to desensitize the public to their presence by mere talk, they resort to large-scale vandalism to get their points across. Anyone who works in a city with a large homosexual population eventually becomes used to seeing homosexual graffiti and annoying little fluorescent stickers plastered all over public and private property by groups like ACT-UP and Queer Nation.
One retired Marine colonel has suggested that we use the most common homosexual euphemisms against them with a tactic that might be called "reverse sensitization." For example, if anyone uses the word "gay" as a descriptive verb, ask them to clarify: "Excuse me, but when you refer to someone who is "gay," do you mean a happy and carefree person, or do you mean a sex pervert?"24
Further Elaboration. Kirk and Pill further describe the details of the homosexual propaganda campaign;
"Without access to TV, radio, and the mainstream press, there will be no campaign ... While we're storming the battlements with salvos of ink, we should also warm the mainstream up a bit with a subtle national campaign on highway billboards. In simple, bold print on dark backgrounds, a series of unobjectionable messages should be introduced; "IN RUSSIA, THEY TELL YOU WHAT TO BE. IN AMERICA WE HAVE THE FREEDOM TO BE OURSELVES ... AND TO BE THE BEST," or "PEOPLE HELPING INSTEAD OF HATING - THAT's WHAT AMERICA IS ALL ABOUT," and so on. Each sign will tap patriotic sentiment, each message will drill a seemingly agreeable proposition into mainstream heads - a "public service message" suited to our purposes. And, if their owners will permit it, each billboard will be signed, in slightly smaller letters, "Courtesy of the National Gay Task Force" - to build positive associations and get the public used to seeing such sponsorship.
"For openers, naturally, we must continue to encourage the appearance of favorable gay characters in films and TV shows. Daytime talk shows also remain a useful avenue for exposure" [emphasis added].
Further Analysis of the Tactic. Pro-homosexual ads have been appearing in hundreds of newspapers all over the United States for several years now. A typical piece shows several women smiling into the camera. They are all, of course, dressed in clothing that `demonstrates' that they are from all walks of life - welder, doctor, lawyer, and so on. The banner headline challenges "GUESS WHICH ONE IS THE LESBIAN," and concludes with "SURPRISE!! THEY ALL ARE!"
The ad goes on to describe how lesbians are just like you and me in every way. It is worth noting that virtually all of these ads have featured women only, because they appear much less threatening than men.
"Do you know the most powerful lobby in the entertainment business? Bigger than blacks or women's lib or any nationalist or racist group. It's the gays. If you don't have the approval of the Gay Media Task Force, you don't go on the air."
- Television producer James Komack.25
Bad Guys But No Bad Gays. Most Christians are aware of the fact that homosexuals hold sway over the nation's media today.
Individuals members of virtually every group of any imaginable description are at least occasionally identified on television as "bad guys." This is not necessarily bad, since bad guys do, indeed, come from every group in society. The media shows us Jewish bad guys, Catholic bad guys, black, red, yellow, white, even extraterrestrial bad guys - but there is one group that is automatically and completely exempted from any negative connotation whatever in the media, even on a purely individual basis.
You will never see a homosexual "bad guy" in the media.
Why is this?
A Heavy Hand. Homosexuals are not portrayed as "bad" in any way because they have a very heavy influence in the media, and (as shown by the above Kirk/Pill quotes) they know that it is absolutely vital to their cause to convince the public that their condition is genetic and not acquired. It is also absolutely essential to ensure that no homosexual is ever depicted as having any character flaw or undesirable characteristic, so that the public will be lulled into believing, perhaps subliminally, that all homosexuals are sweet-natured, basically harmless folks who should be fully integrated into society without delay.
This type of media manipulation is fully recognized by the homosexuals as an essential means to convincing the American public that sodomy is "just another lifestyle."
No Cure For Sure. As an example of such domination, the powerful homosexual lobby will never permit the release of any Hollywood or television movie or show that features any homosexual being "cured" or turning away from his perverted deathstyle. In a 1987 series of TV Guide articles, a large group of television executives agreed that it would be literally impossible to produce a show with this theme.26
Crushing Dissent. The homosexuals will ruthlessly crush any free expression that is not in lockstep with their peculiar worldview, particularly if that expression is intended to be shared with others.
For example, a summer 1988 episode of NBC's "Midnight Caller" originally portrayed a homosexual in less than glowing terms, so a handful of homosexuals quickly organized and loudly demonstrated outside the set. The script was immediately changed, and the program executives bowed and scraped and apologized profusely.27
Anita Bryant had been the Orange Bowl Parade commentator for NBC for nine years, until she "came out of the closet" to fight the radical homosexual agenda. NBC immediately dumped her and hired Rita Moreno, who had always been sympathetic towards homosexuals, and who had starred in the first widely-distributed major movie about homosexuality, The Ritz. Time Magazine, in its August 30, 1976 issue, flatly labeled it "a gay movie."
Moving On to Violence. Even more than pro-abortionists, promiscuous homosexual activists are the most violent and irrational group of people on earth.
Homosexuals by no means restrict themselves to loud and obscene protests when they are displeased with someone who has spoken out against them. They have shown their displeasure in hundreds of instances by physically destroying property and assaulting those who disagree with them.
The Sacramento Union learned this lesson after it published several editorials against California pro-abortion and pro-homosexual initiatives during the summer of 1990. Shortly thereafter, vandals destroyed more than a hundred of the paper's vending machines, causing more than $45,000 of damage. The wrecked machines were plastered with ACT-UP stickers. ACT-UP is the group AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, a homosexual activist group that physically and violently attacks those individuals who dare to oppose its perverted agenda in any way.28
Even churches are not safe from the new legions of homosexual Brownshirts. In December of 1989, four Los Angeles area Catholic churches were defaced and vandalized by homosexual activists. Red paint was splashed everywhere and the words "Mahony murderer" were spraypainted on the church walls. ACT-UP posters were plastered on many windows.29
Roger Cardinal Mahony is the Archbishop of Los Angeles.
The response by the Los Angeles Times? The paper not only did not condemn the attacks, but publicized future activities of the Los Angeles chapter of ACT-UP with the dates, places, and names of Catholic parishes to be targeted by the vandals!29
Even Hollywood is Fed Up. Even some of Hollywood's finest are becoming fed up with this glaring double standard and Nazi-like censorship. In addition to James Komack's statement, quoted above, screenwriter Earnest Kinov complained in 1985 that "You can handle homosexuality - as long as you handle it in a lovely, tolerant fashion that will not upset the gay liberation lobby."30
In June of 1990, none other than The Wall Street Journal editorialized that it seems to be entirely permissible to discuss homosexuality, race, or gender, but only if you hold "the approved point of view."31
This restrictive policy is precisely the one held by homosexual groups. You can say whatever you want to about "Gay Rights," as long as you are in favor of them.
Evidence of Prevalent Bias. The American Family Association (AFA) has monitored television shows dealing with homosexuality and has found that, with a single possible exception, every one of the more than 700 television shows dealing with the subject over the last five years has dealt with homosexuals as heros or sensitive, caring people without a single character flaw.26
A 1987 study by The Center for Media and Public Affairs noted that only nine percent of the persons depicted on television with AIDS are identified as homosexual or bisexual, when in reality, 73 percent of such persons have AIDS. One recent example was Ryan White, whose death by AIDS caused by a blood transfusion was a godsend for the homosexuals, who milked his memory for all it was worth.
This is in keeping with the homosexual lobby's attempt to define AIDS as anything but the "gay disease" it is.
Introduction. As the Lichter-Rothman studies on the source of media biases have shown, most members of the media feel that they should not only provide entertainment, but work for social change. This is evident in many recent depictions of homosexuals. Just three of the more blatant examples are described below.
"Welcome Home, Bobby." The February 22, 1986 prime-time CBS special "Welcome Home, Bobby" begins by showing a 16-year old who believes that he is `sick' by being homosexual. Bobby is then seduced by a 35-year old homosexual, and the rest of the movie shows their courtship, with dates, tender words and gestures, and expensive gifts. Literally everyone supports Bobby's homosexuality - his teachers, businessmen, even a Catholic priest - and they all tell him how perfectly normal this lifestyle is. These people are portrayed as intelligent, loving, and caring. The only holdout is Bobby's father, who is portrayed as a selfish, narrow-minded, judgmental bigot. But even he `becomes enlightened' and "comes to accept Bobby just the way he is."32
"My Two Perverts." The April 7, 1986 television movie "My Two Loves" presents lesbianism as a perfectly normal lifestyle for a widow. She meets Marjorie, a veteran lesbian, who is given plenty of air time to extol the "many virtues of bisexuality." The numerous scenes of lesbianism include the two women in bed and strolling hand-in-hand down a street, happy as can be. ABC had hired a veteran lesbian/feminist writer Rita Mae Brown, and TV scriptwriter Reginald Rose revealed that the network was not only willing but "eager" to air "My Two Loves."33
"The Women of Brewster Place." The ABC March 19-20, 1988 special "The Women of Brewster Place," produced by Oprah Winfrey, centers around the lives of seven black women living in a ghetto. Naturally, a minister is depicted as a lecher who uses his influence to take women members of his congregation to bed. Miss Sophie, another Christian, is a hateful busybody who snoops and lectures, judges and gossips about everyone. She shouts at a caring, gracious, kind and humble lesbian at a meeting, and the lesbian runs out, crying. Sophie, of course, has a perpetual frown on her wrinkled face and the lesbian is a beauty who is always kind and nonjudgmental.34
Homosexuals like to say that public opinion is "maturing" or "becoming more enlightened" (i.e., people are becoming more accepting of perverted sex acts), but this conclusion, surprisingly, is dead wrong.
Tom Smith, director of the General Social Survey at the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center (NORC), says that "The basic survey finding is that moral approval of homosexuality during the past 20 years has shown very little change, and what little change there is has been a slight hardening of attitudes."
The NORC's 1977 General Social Survey, the most authoritative study of national opinion trends, found that 67 percent of adults questioned said that sex between two adults of the same gender was "always wrong." 14 years later, in 1991, the same survey found that the people who held this belief had increased to 71 percent of the population.35
This is a very important and encouraging point for Christian activists. However, if the media's pro-homosexual saturation campaign cannot budge society's distaste for sexual perverts, then all hell is going to break loose when their values are forced down society's throat. There will be an incredibly violent backlash at all levels, which, of course, will be blamed entirely on Christians and anti-"gay rights" activists.
Kirk and Pill brilliantly and concisely summarize the strategy of infiltration and subversion in their book, as shown below.
"When conservative churches condemn gays, there are only two things we can do to confound the homophobia of true believers. First, we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches ... Second, we can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology. Against the mighty pull of Institutional Religion one must set the mightier draw of Science and Public Opinion (the shield and sword of that accursed "secular humanism"). Such an unholy alliance has worked against the churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion. With enough open talk about the prevalence and acceptability of homosexuality, that alliance can work again here" [emphasis added].
The Use of "Desensitization." The homosexuals are logically using the same "desensitization" tactics against the Church that they do against the American public. As Kirk and Pill correctly assert, the same tactic worked with abortion.
This tactic is effective on a general scale, but the homosexuals additionally target specific areas of the Church with two other devastatingly effective tactics.
First, they organize pseudo-religious organizations for the specific purpose of creating confusion among Christians regarding authentic Biblical teaching on homosexuality. Such groups include Affirmation (Mormon), Dignity (Roman Catholic), Integrity (Episcopalian), and the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (formerly the Sodomy Churches).
Secondly, the homosexuals use the influence of child molesters in the Church to undermine its moral authority. More than fifty homosexual Catholic priests and more than 100 mainline Protestant ministers in this country have been charged with child molestation. Imagine the incredible damage that has been done to the image of the Christian Church and to the credibility that priests and ministers have enjoyed until this time.
It is very interesting to note that, if it is true that homosexuals were "born that way," as they so boldly assert, then every one of these priests and ministers knew that he was a homosexual before he entered seminary!
There is one interesting conclusion that might drawn from this fact: Many of these homosexuals purposely infiltrated the Church, hiding their homosexuality, then when they became priests and ministers, they deliberately molested young children to destroy the credibility of the Church!
Take, for example, the Dominican `theologian' Father Edward Schillebeeckx of Holland, a homosexual with a police record for public indecent exposure. Schillebeeckx works tirelessly to undermine the teachings of the Catholic Church in Europe, and has done incalculable damage to the Church.
An organization that collects information on and exposes the conspiracy of known homosexuals subverting the Catholic church from within is;
The Priory of St. Dominic and St. Thomas
7200 West Division Street
River Forest, Illinois 60305
Homosexuals Ridicule Christian Beliefs. Homosexual author Michael Swift claims that homosexuals are "masters of wit and ridicule." He is certainly right on that score.
Take for example the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence," a self-described "order of gay male nuns" whose vows are to "expiate stigmatic guilt and promulgate universal joy." These homosexuals dress up as Catholic nuns, and then take names like "Sister Homocycle Motorsexual;" "Sister Sleaze Du Jour;" "Mother Inferior;" "Sister Florence Nightmare, R.N.;" "Sister Boom Boom;" "Sister Mad, Power-Hungry Bitch;" "Sister Rosanna Hosanna Fellabella;" "Sister Missionary Position;" "Sister Chanel 2001;" "Sister Sadie Sadie the Rabbi Lady;" "Sister Helen Damnation;" "Sister Opiate of the Masses;" "Sister Atrociata von Tasteless;" "Sister Exposia;" and "Sister Perpetually Pruretic Prostate."36
Other gaggles of anti-religious transvestite perverts include the "Sisters of the Guiltless Procession" of Virginia Beach, the "Sisters of Perpetual Motion" of Atlanta, and the "Sisters of Constant Pleasure" of Washington, D.C.
When Pope John Paul II visited San Francisco in 1987, the "Sisters" "canonized" Harvey Milk, the murdered homosexual city supervisor, and then conducted a parody of the Roman Catholic Mass. They handed out foil-wrapped condoms at "communion," and referred to them as "our holy savior," who was to "vouchsafe the safety of our sexual play." The enthusiastic "congregation" was then instructed to inflate the condoms with "the guilt and shame organized religion has foisted" on them, and then pop them.37
Of course, the homosexuals had their Communist hangers-on get into the act, as well. One poster circulated by the so-called "Anti-God and Country Brigade" featured wind-up figures of the Pope, Ayatollah Khomeini, and Jerry Falwell, and bore the caption "If God is so great, how come he has spokesmen like these?"37
The "ministries" of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence include "blessing" venereal disease clinics and assuring everyone that having VD is "nothing to be worried or ashamed about;" passing out buttons that say "YOU DESERVE A FUCK TODAY;" and distributing "Perpetually Indulgent Rainchecks" which promise, among other things, "a fabulous blowjob," "prolonged titwork," "a scrumptious scat scene," and "a fuck you won't forget."36
A "scat scene," for those people with cast-iron stomachs who really want to know, is when homosexuals congregate and defecate on each other, and then smear the feces all over their bodies.
It would be interesting indeed to see how far free speech rights really go if a group of fed-up Catholics decided to initiate some street theater mocking homosexuals and their bizarre lifestyles.
But you're weak!
Equalities are stripped and all your friends agree.
But freedom's just not hip when it's of sexuality.
So you hate!
I hope I live to see the day when your
sexually-repressed hatred is finally washed away.
It seems it's unprivy to yourself
but you're just like everybody else.
So with your fist you wave your fucking flag.
You'll prove it to me now you're no fag."
- Lyrics to the song "Homophobes Are Just Pissed `Cause They Can't Get Laid," by the group `Propagandhi.'
Statement of the Tactic.
Introduction. Kirk and Pill further refine their tactic of taking advantage of the victim status by actually making normal people who oppose them look like the perverts;
"Make the victimizers look bad. At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights - long after other gay ads have become commonplace - it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified ... Our goal here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the mainstream's self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types.
"The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America. These images might include: The Ku Klux Klan demanding that gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; menacing punks, thugs, and convicts speaking coolly about the "fags" they have killed or would like to kill; a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured or gassed ...
"These images should be combined with those of their gay victims by a method propagandists call the "bracket technique." For example, for a few seconds, an unctuous, beady-eyed Southern preacher is seen, pounding the pulpit in rage about "those sick, abominable creatures." While his tirade continues over the soundtrack, the picture switches to pathetic photos of badly beaten persons, or to photos of gays who look decent, harmless, and likable; and then we cut back to the poisonous face of the preacher, and so forth. The contrast speaks for itself. The effect is devastating."
Analysis of the Tactic. Notice how the homosexuals, who constantly stress non-judgmentalism and compassion as the highest good, feel perfectly free to slander, vilify, and lie about Christians. This is a brilliant example of the Neoliberal double-standard, and those who oppose the radical homosexual agenda should use the same weapons to fight back. We, after all, have much more disgusting material to work with than our opponents do!
Normal people have a great advantage in using this tactic, because all we have to do is portray the homosexual as he really is in order to win. Notice that, when they attack their opponents, the homosexuals focus attention on the Ku Klux Klan and the Nazis - the tiniest minority of existing Americans. Anti-"gay rights" activists can use the same tactics. A thirty-second TV spot as follows would hit `Middle America' with the force of a bomb and would be devastating to the "Gay Rights" movement;
The Trigger Words. Those people who have had the courage to fight coercive and unjust "gay rights" laws are invariably pigeonholed by the homophile press and, of course, by the "tolerant" homosexuals themselves. This is a purely offensive tactic and is meant to cast "gay rights" opponents in the role of oppressors of helpless, innocent, cowering "gays."
In the opening salvo of any "gay rights" battle, homosexuals splatter their
opponents with a standard slew of uncomplimentary labels, the most popular
of which are;
It is very useful for anti-"gay rights" activists to know what these words mean and to be able to turn them against their users in a form of verbal karate. The following paragraphs examine each word in detail.
"Homophobe." The word "homophobe" did not even exist until about 15 years ago. It was designed by homophile propagandists purely as a device to label and summarily pigeonhole and dismiss those who opposed them. It is the only one of the above labels that has some truth to it. Many people are frightened and disgusted by what homosexuals do to each other and to innocent people, and are scared of the implications that their perverted morality and lousy physical health have for society.
If an anti-"gay rights" activist can effectively describe homosexual activities to an audience, he might want to proudly claim the title "homophobe," just as the homosexuals have claimed the label "queer" for themselves. But this must be done only after he has properly defined to an audience just what it is that he is alarmed about.
If pro-homosexual activists insist upon labeling their opponents "homophobic" (a person who is unduly afraid of homosexuals and what they do), we may consider responding in kind by labeling them "homomaniacs," which means "a person who unduly fond of homosexuals and what they do."
"Bigot." The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines a "bigot" as "one obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own church, party, belief, or opinion."
Real Christians (not pro-homosexual "children of a looser God") are certainly devoted to their churches and their beliefs, but, by the same token, homosexuals are also committed to their beliefs.
The key word here is "intolerantly," which, according to the Webster's, means "unable or unwilling to endure criticism." "Intolerance" is certainly an ingrained characteristic of every promiscuous homosexual activist. Any debate will clearly demonstrate this fact. If the anti-"gay rights" activist criticizes any aspect of the homosexual lifestyle, or if he dares to go so far as to make fun of some ridiculous homosexual practice like sado-masochism, the homosexuals in the audience will go absolutely crazy. By contrast, the homosexual debater will incessantly attack Christian beliefs and the Christian debater himself, but will get only a calm and rational answer.
This contrast will decisively demonstrate to an audience who the real bigots are.
To further demonstrate the reality of homosexual bigotry, the anti-"gay rights" activist should challenge his opponent to name a single instance where a large crowd of Christians have broken into a homosexual meeting and disrupted it with violence and harassment. Then the Christian can describe some of the incidents where homosexuals have blocked highways, broken into churches and assaulted parishioners, and shouted down speakers who had messages that they did not like. He might describe some of the incidents listed earlier in this chapter; the "Falwell Game," the attacks on Catholic churches by raving homosexuals, and the ordeal of Pastor Chuck McIlhenny. Then he might read a couple of the homosexual "vows of violence" listed in Figure 118-1 and challenge his opponent to name a similar vow made by any Christian.
Finally, he might verbally inquire of the audience who the real bigots are.
"Nazi." Homosexual activists commonly cast their opponents in the role of "oppressive, dominating Nazis/Fascists." During any drive to repeal or oppose laws enacted under the auspices of "gay rights," a favorite tactic of the homosexuals is to plaster pictures of Adolf Hitler literally everywhere and compare him and his Nazis to whatever group is taking a stand against them.
This is an absolutely textbook-perfect example of transference, where a group of people project their most undesirable qualities onto their opponents in an attempt to pull them down to a common low moral level. The psychology of this defense mechanism is described in detail in Chapter 13 of Volume I, "Transference."
The very best way to shoot down the derogatory "Nazi" comparison in a debate is to quote the homosexuals themselves and show one or two transparencies of Nazi-related homosexual advertisements.
Eric Pollard, a charter member of ACT-UP, revealed in the homosexual newspaper The Washington Blade that "ACT-UP's subversive tactics ... were drawn largely from the voluminous Mein Kampf, which some of us studied as a working model."38
Mein Kampf, of course, was Adolf Hitler's magnum opus, describing his time in prison and his vision and tactics for implementing the climb of the Third Reich to absolute power.
It is interesting to note the reaction of homosexuals when someone brings up the fact that Hitler's strongarm specialists, the Brown Shirts, were basically a homosexual club.38
It is also interesting to note that about five percent of the sexual advertisements and classified ads in The Advocate Magazine - considered to be the "voice of the mainstream gay rights movement" - feature a strongly Nazi theme.
For example, the April 9, 1991 issue of The Advocate featured a number of Nazi-related ads, including "NAZI ANYONE? For Info write to: National Socialist League, Box 26496A, CA 90026," and "ACHTUNG! Teutonic Lord Muscle Master..."39
Note that no "mainstream" heterosexual publication like Time or Newsweek carries recruiting ads for Nazi or White supremacist organizations. Note also that there were absolutely no letters of protest over this advertisement featured in subsequent issues of The Advocate.
The Advocate also features half- and full-page sexual advertisements that feature nearly naked men clothed in bits of Nazi regalia, the most common of which is a Nazi stormtrooper's hat. An anti-"gay rights" debater should ask his opponent when he last observed any such advertisements in a "mainline" heterosexual publication.
Domination and submission are very big themes in homosexual pornography, and the natural "dominant" personalities are both legitimate and illegitimate authority figures. The Nazis represent the ultimate in dominant authority figures, and so they and other racists and fascists figure heavily in homosexual porn, as evidenced by movie and book titles uncovered by the 1986 Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. These included;
It is curious indeed that a group that compares itself to Blacks and Jews and women has such a high percentage of Nazi advertisements combined with an almost complete absence of Blacks and Jews and women. According to the most exhaustive study ever done of homosexual advertisements, less than two percent of the 446,000 "sex wanted" ads placed in The Advocate over a twenty-year period featured minorities or women. Almost all of the ads expressed a strong preference for the homosexual "dream man" - the muscular blonde and blue-eyed Aryan type.39
It is interesting to note that Black homosexuals feel disenfranchised from the movement that alleges to represent them. Marlon Riggs, the Black homosexual who made the homosexual porn film "Tongues Untied," decried this blatant racism when he complained of the "racism that confronts Black men" and said that he was refused entrance to a homosexual bar because of his color. He also said that he was "an invisible man in the great White gay mecca" of San Francisco.40
One final note: Pro-homosexual debaters are completely predictable, just as abortophile debaters are. Therefore, any anti-"gay rights" debater will be accused of "being fascinated by homosexual erotic literature" and he will be accused of being a "closet gay." In other words, the homosexual will vigorously try to "out" any person who opposes him in public.
The responses to these inevitable attacks are varied in nature, but the anti-"gay rights" debater might admit that he is indeed "fascinated" by homosexual porn, just as any normal person would be "fascinated" by something horrible like a human corpse rotting in his front yard. And he might respond to the accusation that he is a "closet gay" by pointing out that, under this flawed logic, members of the audience who are against child abuse are "latent child abusers" themselves. The premise that anyone who opposes something actually practices that activity is appallingly stupid and should be exposed as such.
"Hateful." One of the most effective tactics used by homosexuals is their pitiable bleating about the "tidal wave of hate crimes" directed against them by "homophobic bigots." In many cities (San Francisco included, of course), homosexuals use permanent paint and templates to make two-dimensional monuments to "bashed gays" on city streets, and God help anyone who paints them over or defaces them.
Homosexuals have sworn vengeance against their enemies, have promised mass murder, represent eight of the top ten serial killers in our country's history (see Chapter 120 for documentation), and do things to each other for fun that a normal person would not even do to his worst enemy.
And then they turn around and call Christians "full of hate!"
The proper response to this accusation is a vigorous and decisive condemnation of the "gay rights" advocate as a hypocrite, followed by a vivid description of an example of hateful anti-homosexual behavior directed against Christians (such as the attacks on Pastor McIlhenny or the caperings of the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence," as described above). This should be wrapped up with a couple of quotes by homosexuals swearing violence and with a description of homosexuals disrupting a church service and assaulting parishioners.
It is very curious indeed that the same group of people that constantly squawks about violence and "gay-bashing" commonly advertises for extreme violence in its magazines.
The two magazines that are considered to be most representative of "gay" culture are The Advocate and the now-defunct Outweek Magazine. Typical examples of advertising for violent treatment in these two magazines are shown below.
"BRUTALITY ... Attractive white male, 28, seeks extreme masochist under 35 - any race, who seriously wants violent, brutal pounding, no holds barred. Should be reasonably well put together & able to take excruciating pain on all parts of the body. Heavy scenes only."
"RAINMAKERS: 7TH YEAR!! Watersports andenemas.
SMELLY JOCKS PLUS: * Stinky stained jocks$20 * Smelly gym socks $20*
SPIT!! Raunchy dudes who give or take thickhockers right in the face, Dom. V/A, etc."
"LASHMATES: National whip/spank club.
ENEMA VIDEOS: Doctor and young patient,enema scene ... enemas, urinating ... 2 very young men are examined & humiliated by sadistic doctor.
DIAPER GUY: Wet pants/bed, watersports, spankfantasy/true stories, photos, products."
References. Upper: Outweek Magazine, April 10, 1991. Lower: The Advocate, April 9, 1991, pages 5 to 68.
After describing these ads and other homosexual activities, it is amusing indeed to sit back and watch a homosexual try to explain to an audience why some people like to be beat up and abused in homosexual "dungeons" built specifically for that purpose, but when somebody does exactly the same thing to them on the street, then it is suddenly a "hate crime" and "gay bashing." It is also amusing to ask how the members of a group of people that is constantly boasting about its intelligence would pay twenty bucks for a "stinky stained jock," when such a `treasure' could be obtained free with a couple of hours of hard labor.
One statement that is sure to get an outraged response from homosexuals and a chuckle from normal onlookers is an innocent observation that "gays" should enjoy getting beat up by "homophobes" if they enjoy being beat up by other "gays." Note that violence against homosexuals just because they are homosexuals can never be tolerated; so violence by homosexuals against other homosexuals should also be condemned.
The pervasive Neoliberal double standard is particularly strong among homosexuals, who feel free to ridicule and slander their opposition, but squawk loudly and indignantly when anyone pokes fun at them.
One of the most egregious examples of this double standard was recently produced by the San Francisco video game company RJ Best when it released the action game "Gay Blade." The first screen of this game tells the player that his assignment is to eliminate "Bible-thumping lunatics, rabid politicians, and other vile entities."41
The mainline press did not make a peep about this game.
Now try to imagine what the media moguls would have done if some Christian group had produced a video game that instructed the player to kill "simpering queers, transvestites, and other sex perverts."
"Discriminatory." The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines "discrimination" to mean "to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit."
The problem here is that homosexuals and Christians have radically different definitions of "individual merit." Homosexuals think that their private lives should be judged entirely separate from their public lives.
A classic example is the homosexual Congressman Gerry Studds, whom one major newspaper described as "The avowed homosexual who was censured by the House of Representatives for having had sex with a teen-age male Congressional page. In fact, Studds had seduced the page, after giving him dinner and drinks at his apartment, and tried to seduce two others. Studds showed no remorse over his behavior."42
Studds also ran a homosexual prostitution ring out of his Washington, D.C. apartment.
After this disgusting episode, one homosexual political action committee (PAC) poured $10,000 into Studds' reelection fund and urged voters to "reward his courage" and significantly urged them to "help make Gerry Studds a symbol of hope for all gay men and lesbians."42
The term "discrimination" is popular with the average promiscuous homosexual because he really believes that a person's moral life can be separated from his practical life, i.e., we shouldn't believe that a person will lie and cheat at work just because he lies and cheats in sexual matters.
Christians tend to look at the "whole man," which is a common-sense approach to life. If a person (whether homosexual or heterosexual) has made a mess of his personal life because he cheats on his wife, is an alcoholic, and beats his kids, we believe that he will be less than an ideal employee (or renter), and we are generally correct.
A second point to remember when considering the term "discrimination" is that it is traditionally associated with the repression of the civil rights of genuine minority groups, which are comprised of people who were born with a non-White skin color, or with some type of physical or mental handicap.
Homosexuals are certainly not a genuine "minority" or "civil rights group," because their behavior is elective, not inborn, as described in Chapter 116, "Homosexual Orientation." Homosexuals are trying to paint themselves as a group worthy of legal protection under civil rights laws, but this makes no more sense than a parallel attempt by any other group that engages in illicit or illegal behavior - rapists, embezzlers, and White supremacists, to name a few.
To imply that homosexuals are somehow economically disadvantaged like real minority groups is absurd. Most normal people are sick of hearing homosexuals whine about how hard it is for them to hold jobs and how they occupy the lowest rung of the ladder in many corporations.
The truth is exactly the opposite of what homosexuals would like us to believe. According to the Wall Street Journal, homosexuals have a much higher per-capita income and rate of college graduates than normal people. They also hold more high-level jobs and travel much more often than normal people, as shown below.
|Average annual household income||
|Overseas travel in 1987||
|Frequent fliers in 1987||
Reference. Wall Street Journal, July 18, 1991, page B1. Data provided by the United States Census Bureau and the Simmons Market Research Bureau.
The per-capita income of homosexuals is even higher than that implied in the above figure, because they have an average of only 1.6 persons per household as compared to normal people, who have an average of 1.8 children and an overall average of 3.1 people per household, including single people.
Speaking of households, one myth that the more ignorant element of the public seems distressingly eager to accept is the portrait of the "committed and loving homosexual couple." If this myth is accepted, it would, of course, be the strongest `proof' that homosexuals are just like normal people.
Homosexuals especially focus on the image of the "committed and loving" pair of homosexuals when they agitate for marriage rights and domestic partner benefits, but, in reality, such `bonding' is extremely rare. Advertising in The Advocate showed less than one percent of homosexuals were looking for a monogamous relationship. 99 percent advertised for casual sex.
Only two percent of homosexuals could be classified as monogamous or even "semi-monogamous" (ten or fewer lifetime sexual partners).[39,43] Additionally, the average homosexual "marriage" lasts less than two years - and half of the "partners" cheat incessantly during that short time span.
"Ignorant." When used as an epithet, this word usually means that a person is lacking in both knowledge and common sense. It is generally used in conjunction with the word "bigot," i.e., "Those who oppose gay rights laws are just ignorant bigots."
Any Christian who enters the "gay rights" debate had better not be ignorant. He should know a lot about the homosexual orientation and psychology, about their practices, and about their tactics. In other words, he must not only be informed, he must have a cast-iron constitution.
If a pro-"gay rights" debater uses the term "ignorant" in public, the Christian might point out that homosexuals live an average of 31 years less than normal people, as described in Chapter 120, "Homosexual Practices." He might highlight the fact that homosexuals commit suicide at five times the national average, carry an average of three sexually-transmitted diseases, and are the most unhappy and addicted group people on earth.
Then the Christian might ask "now who's ignorant?"
Unfortunately for Christians, it is the public that is woefully unknowledgable about homosexual practices. If anti-"gay rights" activists could only fully inform the individual members of the public about the disgusting and dangerous things that homosexuals do to each other and to innocent children, the resulting outcry would drive them back into the closet where they belong.
Homosexual Tactic #5:
Bait and Swith: Hide True Nature
Kirk and Pill say that homosexuals must;
"Give protectors a just cause. Few straight women, and even fewer straight men, will want to defend homosexuality boldly as such. Most would rather attach their awakened principle of justice or law to some general desire for consistent and fair treatment in society. Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, but should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme ... The homophobes clothe their emotional revulsion in the daunting robes of religious dogma, so defenders of gay rights must be ready to counter dogma with principle."
"Make gays look good. In order to make a Gay Victim sympathetic to straights, you have to portray him as Everyman. But an additional theme of the campaign should be more aggressive and upbeat: The campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society. Yes, yes, we know - this trick is so old it creaks. Other minorities use it all the time in ads that announce proudly, "Did you know that this Great Man (or Woman) was [gay]?
"But the message is vital for all those straights who still picture gays as "queer" people - shadowy, lonesome, frail, drunken, suicidal, child-snatching misfits. Along the same lines, we shouldn't overlook the Celebrity Endorsement. The celebrities can be straight (God bless you, Ed Asner, wherever you are), or gay" [emphasis added].
Analysis of the Tactic. The homosexuals believe that, by "identifying" famous people as homosexuals, some of their `glory' will rub off on the current homosexual-rights movement.
This is a fine example of the very common Neoliberal tactic of history revisionism, which is described in detail in Chapter 11 of Volume I. As homosexual writer Michael Swift admitted in the essay that is included in Chapter 117, "We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world ..."44
The homosexual's favorite so-called famous "gays" are probably Plato and Socrates, who both spoke of the "beauty of love between men." Homosexuals also claim that Michelangelo was "one of them," based solely on an attempt by a notorious criminal named Aretino to blackmail him.45
For people who claim to be so smart, homosexuals are certainly not historians or linguists. Language and words change meaning through the years - and particularly through the centuries.
Plato and Socrates, of course, were speaking not of physical love, not even of emotional love, but of spiritual love in the same manner described by Jesus Christ.
Homosexuals, of course, will not take the time to search the primary sources for the truth - both Plato (in The Phaedrus) and Socrates (in The Laws) condemned homosexual acts.
After all, what does "Platonic love" mean, other than nonsexual love?
The tactic of "history revisionism" can be countered by listing a few very undesirable homosexuals, including the many homosexual serial killers and mass murderers. It is useful to point out that, even though homosexuals claim to make up only 5 to 10 percent of the population in this country (a gross exaggeration), they comprise more than forty percent of all mass murderers and serial killers (for documentation, see Chapter 120, "Homosexual Practices").
Homosexual Tactic #6:
Intimidate With Violence and Vandalism
"Great Sinners Against Yahweh"
Introduction. The homosexuals must conceal the incredibly vicious tactics they are using in their drive to gain "equality." After all, "victims" do not usually attack people physically and in the press.
Anyone who has dealt with homosexual activists knows that they are extremely vicious. The Bible correctly labels them "vicious men, great sinners against Yahweh" (Genesis 13:13).
However, once in a while, the homosexual's elaborately constructed facade slips just a little, and we get a glimpse of their true nature. The following incidents and quotes show that homosexuals may be angry, but they are definitely not "gentle."
Attack On a Cathedral. Homosexuals and pro-abortionists belonging to the groups ACT-UP (AIDS Contracted Through Unspeakable Perversions) and WHAM (Women's Health Action Mobilization) stormed New York's St. Patrick's Cathedral on December 10, 1989, assaulting parishioners, disrupting Cardinal John O'Connor's Mass by screaming and shoving people, and desecrating the consecrated Host by throwing It on the ground and stamping on It. Outside, hundreds of screaming homosexuals burned Cardinal O'Connor in effigy and attacked passersby, all because the Cardinal had refused to toe their immoral "safe sex" line.37
The placards the homosexuals carried displayed slogans such as;
It is obvious to even the most casual observer that these posters are not meant to merely protest; their messages directly attack Christianity and are meant to ridicule the most cherished beliefs of Catholics.
After the invasion of St. Patrick's cathedral, ACT-UP issued a press statement saying that its cause is "... important enough [to allow us] to invade any space, to disrupt any speech."
The organizers of the sacrilege - the self-proclaimed "Safe Sex Six" - were sentenced by Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Jo Ann Ferdinand to from 75 to 100 hours of community service. She refused to imprison or fine them, saying that she "admired their commitment," and compared them to Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, a comparison that Ray Kerrison of the New York Post found "... so utterly bizarre that it besmirches the memory of two genuine historic figures."46
In December of 1990, in defiance of a court order resulting from the attack one year earlier, homosexuals broke into the Mass once again and made off with consecrated Hosts, which they gleefully displayed outside.47
Speaking of the original invasion, San Francisco member Greg Taylor acknowledged that ACT-UP might even be damaging the cause of the homosexual movement as a whole when he said that "It is ACT-UP's job to be disruptive and it is the job of other AIDS groups to pick up the pieces."
Like rabid dogs, the homosexuals will viciously attack even those who are trying to help them. Ironically, Cardinal O'Connor has probably done more than anyone else to help AIDS patients in New York City. His Archdiocese operates a 300-bed facility exclusively for AIDS patients, and he plans to construct 500 more beds. Additionally, O'Connor has frequently worked directly with AIDS patients himself.
It is no surprise that mainline newspapers that carefully examine every breath taken by Operation Rescue and other pro-lifers for the slightest trace of racism, sexism, or homophobia, simply ignore the hate and bigotry of the homosexuals.
Religious Intolerance. In 1989 and 1990, homosexuals waged a continuing war of vandalism and outright destruction against Catholic churches in Los Angeles. Homosexual attackers calling themselves "Greater Religious Responsibility" claimed responsibility for vicious attacks against Cardinal Roger Mahony, calling him a "murderer" for opposing their "safe sex" programs and for labeling the use of condoms "immoral."29
They attacked the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption in Los Angeles, desecrating it with bloody-red hand prints and pornographic photographs of perverted sex acts plastered on the windows.29 ACT-UP posters were pasted everywhere.
At St. Catherine's, they nailed a ten-foot cross festooned with plastic penises and used condoms to the church door. They smeared the chancery with animal blood and entrails that appeared to be the products of Satanic sacrifices.
At the traditional Christmas Day 1990 Mass at St. Mary's in Washington, D.C., ACT-UP and other homosexual groups invaded the church, destroyed candle stands, assaulted parishioners, and noisily shouted and displayed obscene placards.48
One of the favorite tactics of these violent groups is to invade ordination Masses, surround the newly-ordained priests and pelt them with condoms.47
Oppose Us - and Die! Dr. Chuck McIlhenny has been pastor of San Francisco's First Orthodox Presbyterian Church for 17 years. In 1989, he exercised his Constitutional rights of free speech and assembly and helped engineer the defeat of a domestic partnership law that would have forced the public to accept homosexual immorality by compelling everyone to treat two homosexuals as a family. Anyone who did not willingly comply would be heavily fined or jailed.
As one of the city's few politically active pastors, McIlhenny and his family became the focus of intense and vicious homosexual hate. For three years, they received thousands of threatening and harassing phone calls 24 hours a day, and many callers swore to sodomize and kill the McIlhenny's three young daughters.49
McIlhenny's home and church were firebombed. In 1990, homosexual groups repeatedly vandalized the church and home with graffiti like "Dykes for Choice," and attacked the crisis pregnancy center housed in the church. Cowardly, skulking homosexuals broke the church's windows so many times the parishioners boarded them up permanently.49
Terroristic Temper Tantrum. When California Governor Pete Wilson vetoed the "gay rights" legislation sent to his desk in 1991, hundreds of screaming homosexuals rioted and overpowered police. They grabbed wooden police barriers and used them to smash the heavy plate glass in several office buildings, and then used the broken glass like Frisbees, pitching them at the knees of police. At least one policeman had his kneecaps shattered by this technique. The rioting homosexuals set fire to one building, causing $250,000 in damages.
In keeping with greater police department "sensitivity" towards "gays," there were no arrests.50
Now consider what the police and the government would do to pro-lifers who rioted in the street as the homosexuals did.
Lesbian-Run Abortion Mills. It seems natural that homosexuals would eventually get involved in negative eugenics in a big way. From their point of view, homosexuality is a biological "good" and heterosexuality is a biological "bad" (read homosexual Michael Swift's essay in Chapter 117 for more evidence of the existence of homosexual eugenics).
It is common knowledge to most pro-life picketers that many abortion mills are owned, operated, and staffed primarily by lesbians. One of these is the Routh Street Women's Clinic in San Francisco, which is operated by self-proclaimed lesbian Charlotte Taft. It kills 4,000 babies every year and simultaneously operates an artificial insemination program called "Another Choice." The overwhelming majority of those who take advantage of this service are lesbians.51
In summary, this facility kills babies for heterosexuals and grows babies for homosexuals. It is easy to imagine what would happen if the situation were reversed, and a hospital only allowed abortions for mothers if they were lesbians.
Playing the "Falwell Game." Some homosexuals commonly engage in organized and illegal telephone harassment directed against their perceived enemies. This organized harassment is advertised and promoted widely in the homosexual press. Jerry Falwell probably experienced the worst harassment of this type in 1985 and 1986, when homosexuals were urged by "gay" publications to play "The Falwell Game." This "game" consisted simply of calling Falwell's toll-free number and then hanging up. One publication urged callers to sign up as a faith partner and ask for literature and Bibles with the intent of not paying, and to ask others to do the same.52
According to an April 1986 letter sent by Falwell to his supporters, his ministry suffered more than one million harassment phone calls and wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Bibles and printed matter on homosexuals.
The homosexuals who gleefully promote this type of abuse are the same people why angrily denounce pro-lifers who call abortion mills to tie up their lines and make false appointments. Any such action directed against a toll-free homosexual number, of course, would instantly be labeled a "hate crime," and the homosexuals would immediately demand massive government intervention and protection.
Homosexual Promises of Violence. In general, homosexuals have become so bold that they know that they can get away with just about anything. Even the secular press reports on their vows of violence, but this reporting has little effect. The average person couldn't care less about homosexual violence until it happens to him - and, even then, he may be afraid to react for fear of being labeled a "homophobe."
A few homosexual "vows of violence" are listed in Figure 118-1. This list may be photocopied and distributed at debates, presentations, and other events. It has a great impact upon those who continue to think that all "gays" are "peaceful and harmless."
Homosexual Tactic #7:
Abuse the Political Process
Statement of the Tactic
In their book, Kirk and Pill advocate abusing the political process to accomplish homosexual goals, as described below.
"Well before the next elections for national office, we might lay careful plans to run symbolic gay candidates for every high political office in this country. Our candidates could ... demand equal time on the air. They could then graciously pull out of the races before the actual elections, while formally endorsing more viable straight contenders (with malicious humor, perhaps, in some states we could endorse our most rabid opponents). It is essential not to ask people actually to vote Yea or Nay on the gay issue at this early stage: Such action would end up committing most to the Nay position and would only tally huge and visible defeats for our cause" [emphasis added].
Analysis of the Tactic. This paragraph reveals the homosexual knowledge that the vast majority of Americans think that their behavior and deathstyle are despicable. One example of a public vote on the "gay issue" recently occurred in one of the most liberal states in the United States - Oregon.
Oregon homosexuals had failed twice to secure special privileges by ballot measure and no fewer than seven times through the state legislature. The homosexuals finally recognized that they could not get their agenda past the people or the legislature, so they bided their time.
They did not have long to wait. A pro-homosexual governor, Neil Goldschmidt, was elected to office in 1986. He promptly fulfilled one of his campaign promises and signed into a law an Executive Order (EO) giving special rights to homosexuals.
The conservative Oregon Citizens Alliance (OCA) took exception to this blatant executive end-run, and fought an uphill battle against the Governor, both state legislative houses, and all of the media, including the arts. The OCA took the issue to the people, who overturned the Governor's homosexual "special rights" executive order by a wide margin. Naturally, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) thwarted the will of the people by disputing the results of the election in court. The OCA initiative was thrown out by the liberal Oregon courts in late 1992.
The above Kirk/Pill passage indirectly hints at the practice of "outing," where homosexuals accuse persons in important positions of being homosexuals, whether such allegations are true or not. As Wayne Harris, a Portland, Oregon member of ACT-UP states, "If the gay community encourages gays to pass as heterosexuals, we will never attain civil rights. It has become not a right but a duty to come out."53 Richard Rouilard, editor of The Advocate editor, backed up Harris with the claim that "We're in favor of outing right-wing homophobes in society, the church and government who are hurting gays."
"Outing" is one more example of how the homosexuals demand special treatment. While they demand absolute privacy for themselves, they are perfectly willing to destroy the privacy and reputation of those they consider to be their enemies.
 Rand Schrader, an openly homosexual appointee to the Los Angeles Municipal Court. Quoted in Betina Boxall. "Gay Rights Gain Political Forum Outside Closet." The Oregonian, September 29, 1992, page A3.
 Alexander S. Chee. "Queer Nation: A Queer Nationalism." The Lavender Network, November 1990, page 15.
 Journal of the American Medical Association, February 4, 1983. Also described in New Dimensions Magazine, March 1990.
 American Academy of Pediatrics. Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases (1988 Red Book). 566 pages, 21st Edition. Pages 91 to 114 of this report show that 1.30% of people with AIDS are under five years old; 0.25% are from 5 to 12 years old; and 0.42% are from 13 to 19 years old.
 John Leo. "When Activism Becomes Gangsterism." U.S. News and World Report, February 5, 1990, page 18.
 United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States. 1990 (110th Edition). United States Government Printing Office.
 Rachel Zimmerman. "The Perfect Victim: Azalea Cooley." Willamette Week [Portland, Oregon], November 26-December 3, 1992, page 1.
 Cheryl Martinis. "Man Pleads Guilty to 2 Deaths." The Oregonian, February 3, 1993, pages A1 and A9.
 Jim Redden. "The Politics of Paranoia: Taking a Second Look at Gay Bashing Statistics." PDXS Magazine, April 26, 1993, page 3.
 Leslie Bond. "Hemlock Society Burns Responses to Euthanasia Survey." National Right to Life News, March 10, 1988, page 5.
 "Echoes of the 50s in Rooney Witch Hunt." The Wall Street Journal, February 14, 1990.
 Mike Wallace of CBS, quoted in Joseph Farah. "How Homosexual Thought Police Muzzled Rooney." American Family Association Journal, March 1990, page 20.
 William Doino, Jr. "Connecticut Bishop's Reversal on Homosexual Rights Bill Creates Shock Waves." The Wanderer, April 4, 1991, pages 1 and 10.
 Eloise Salholz. "The Future of Gay America." Newsweek Magazine, March 12, 1990, page 23.
 Charlotte Low. "Gays Playing." Insight on the News, September 17, 1990, pages 8 to 14.
 "The Week." National Review, February 19, 1988, page 14.
 William Cheshire. The Arizona Republic. Incident recounted in the Family Research Newsletter, Fall 1989, page 3.
 Paul Weyrich. "Politically Correct Fascism on Our Campuses." New Dimensions Magazine, June 1991, page 44.
 Political science professor Jean Betheke Elshtain. Quoted in Stephen Goode. "Efforts to Deal With Diversity Can Go Astray." Insight Magazine, September 10, 1990, pages 15 to 19.
 Christopher Commission findings as reported on Page 2A of the July 10, 1991 USA Today, "Messages Tell the Story."
 Peter Arnold. "A Victory for the First Amendment." Conservative Digest, February 1985, page 17.
 "New Sexual Victims: Cross Dressers." Family Research Newsletter, January-March 1991, page 5.
 "Faith and Homosexuality" and "Discriminate Against Homosexuals?" Family Research Newsletter, January-March 1991, pages 6 and 7.
 Letter from Colonel G.T. Armitage (Ret.) of Melbourne, Florida, to Fidelity Magazine, April 1987, page 11.
 Television producer James Komack, quoted in David A. Neobel. The Homosexual Revolution. Tulsa, Oklahoma: American Christian College Press. 1977, 192 pages, $1.95 paperback. Page 103.
 Joseph Farah. "Liberation From Homosexuality: TV's Taboo Subject." American Family Association Journal, February 1988, page 12.
 Tim Wildmon. "Networks Practice Double Standard." American Family Association Journal, May 1989, page 2.
 Newspage. "Did Homosexuals Vandalize Pro-Life Newspaper's Machines?" Focus on the Family Citizen, November 19, 1990, page 5.
 "Mahony and the Times." National Catholic Register, February 11, 1990, page 4.
 Randall Murphree. "AIDS and the Media: Whitewashed Tombs." National Federation for Decency Journal, July 1987, page 16.
 Paul Harvey. "Name of the Game is Intolerance." Conservative Chronicle, June 20, 1990, Page 27.
 "AIDS, Gays, and the Media." American Family Association Journal, February 1988, page 17.
 "ABC Pushes Lesbian Love in Movie."National Federation for Decency Journal, May/June 1986, pages 21 and 22.
 "Adulterous Preacher, Illicit Sex Are in NBC Special Movie." American Family Association Journal, May 1989, pages 4 and 5.
 Richard Morin, director of polling for The Washington Post. "Attitudes Aren't Split on Gay Issue - They're Rigid." The Oregonian, February 18, 1993, page D9.
 John Allec. "No More Guilt! A Tour of the Territory of Perpetual Indulgence." BodyPolitic ("A Magazine for Gay Liberation"), March 1982, pages 30 to 32.
 E. Michael Jones. "The Pope and the Condom Worshippers." Fidelity Magazine, October 1987, pages 32-44. Also see Just Out Magazine, January 1990, page 10.
 Eric Pollard, charter member of ACT-UP. Quoted in The Washington Blade, January 1992. For background information on how homosexuals were recruited and welcomed into the Nazi movement, read S. William Halpern. Germany Tried Democracy: A Political History of the Third Reich, 1918-1933. New York: Norton Books, 1946. Also see Berthold Hinz. Art in the Third Reich. New York: Pentheon Books, 1979. These two books document the heavy homosexual influence in the Third Reich, including the predominance of homosexual and pornographic art.
 Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichel. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990. 237 pages. Pages 20 to 23 and 40.
 Marlon Riggs, quoted in The Washington Times, July 16, 1991, page E-4, and the homosexual magazine Wisconsin Light, May 30-April 12, 1991.
 "News Notes." The Wanderer, March 25, 1993, page 3.
 As described in "Gays Step Up Efforts." Human Events, November 3, 1984, page 8.
 A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith. Sexual Preference and Sexual Preference: Statistical Appendix. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1981. Pages 308 and 309. Some of these results were tabulated from a 550-item questionnaire answered by 4,340 adults from Los Angeles, Denver, Omaha, Louisville, Dallas, and Washington, DC in 1983 and 1984. This survey was conducted by the Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality.
44] This essay was printed in the February 15, 1987 issue of the homosexual newspaper Gay Community News by Michael Swift, and was reprinted in the February 15-21 1987 Congressional Record.
 Letter from Irving Stone to Abigail Van Buren (Dear Abby), Washington Star, April 20, 1981. Described in Father Enrique T. Rueda. The Homosexual Network. $29.95, 1986, 700 pages. Order from the Devin Adair Company, 143 Sound Beach Avenue, Post Office Box A, Old Greenwich, Connecticut 06870. Page 136.
 Henry V. King. "Cardinal O'Connor Calls On Catholics to Counter "War Against the Family"." The Wanderer, January 24, 1991, page 1.
 John Leo. "The Gay Tide of Catholic-Bashing." U.S. News and World Report, April 1, 1991, page 15. Also reprinted in the April 14, 1991 issue of Our Sunday Visitor, page 19.
 "A Pall of Evil." From the Mail, The Wanderer, March 14, 1991, page 3.
 "The McIlhennys: Victims of Hate." Focus on the Family Citizen, August 20, 1990, pages 14 and 15.
 As described in an October 1991 letter from Focus on the Family.
 Sally Giddens. "The Abortionist's Tale." D Magazine, August 1990, pages 51 to 54 and 81 to 83.
 "Hey, Kids! Let's All Play the Falwell Game!" Seattle Gay News, January 17, 1986.
 Alan K. Ota. "Outing." The Oregonian, June 24, 1990, page M1. Also see William A. Henry III. "Forcing Gays Out of the Closet." Time Magazine, January 29, 1990, page 67.
Ronald Bayer. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. New York: Basic Books, 1981. This author defies the strong politically correct wind from the American Psychiatric Association and tells, among other things, how homosexuals have used certain medical societies to defraud the public and further their own ends.
Paul Cameron. Exposing the AIDS Scandal. Huntington House Publishers, Post Office Box 53788, Lafayette, Louisiana 70505. 1988, 151 pages. The author, who is universally hated by homosexuals because he pulls no punches, certainly does not do so in this book, which blasts C. Everett Koop, a cowardly government, and the homosexuals themselves. Cameron also reveals the magnitude of the AIDS threat and describes how current policies help to spread instead of retard the disease.
Conservative Review. This periodical examines various issues, with particular emphasis on the homosexual movement and its underhanded tactics. Subscription price is $28 per year. Write to 1133 13th Street NW, Suite C-2, Washington, DC 20005-4297.
Congressman William Dannemeyer. Shadow in the Land. Order from Ignatius Press, 15 Oakland Avenue, Harrison, New York 10528. 1989, $9.95. A comprehensive overview of the homosexual movement - its origins, evolution, and social and political objectives.
Journal of the American Family Association. Formerly the Journal of the National Federation for Decency, this excellent monthly primarily addresses pornography in the media and the arts and the many instances of media pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, and anti-Christian bias. To subscribe, write to the American Family Association, Post Office Drawer 2440, Tupelo, Mississippi 38803. Telephone: (601) 844-5036.
Dick Hafer. Homosexuality: Legitimate, Alternate Deathstyle. $7.95, 204 pages. The "comics commando" strikes again with a comic-book style book on the various aspects of homosexuality: Homosexual practices, including pedophilia; AIDS; the "gay agenda;" and facts about homosexual orientation. This book is not only easy to read because of its format, but also full of well-documented and footnoted information.
Roger J. Magnuson. Are Gay Rights Right? Straitgate Press, 2200 West 66th Street, Suite 190, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423. 1986; $7.00. Reviewed by Chilton Williamson, Jr. on page 58 of the July 18, 1986 issue of National Review. The author examines the strategies and tactics used by the homosexual movement and carefully looks at the root of the problem to arrive at the conclusion that `gay rights' are not a viable subject for legislation. He also takes a close look at the stated objectives of the `gay rights' movement, i.e., a superior position in society.
David A. Noebel, Wayne C. Lutton, and Paul Cameron. AIDS: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Summit Ministries Research Center, Manitou Springs, Colorado, 80829. 1985, 149 pages, $3.95. Reviewed by Chilton Williamson, Jr. on page 58 of the April 11, 1986 issue of National Review. A review of the literature that has been written about AIDS, and an examination of the tactics used by homosexuals to take advantage of the plague to further their own goals.
Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichel. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990. 237 pages. An excellent and detailed examination of the background of the Alfred Kinsey sexual studies that "showed" that children are sexual from birth and that ten percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. This book examines in detail the flaws in Kinsey's studies, and looks at the machinations of modern-day `sexologists' who build their work on his studies. Reisman also details the impacts that Kinsey-style sex education has had on our country.
Father Enrique T. Rueda. The Homosexual Network. $29.95, 1986, 700 pages. Order from the Devin Adair Company, 143 Sound Beach Avenue, Post Office Box A, Old Greenwich, Connecticut 06870. The author covers every aspect of the homosexual network; its acceptability, tactics, subculture, ideology, goals, everything; this is the most complete book on the subject ever written. The book addresses in detail the homosexual ideology, subcultures, religion, goals, funding, and intimate connections with Neoliberalism. It includes a 72-page section on the influence and role of homosexuality in the Catholic Church. Also covered are the "Gayellow Pages," ties between the movement and the Neoliberals and Neofeminists. The book also deals with the connections between homosexuality and organized pedophile groups.
Father Enrique T. Rueda and Michael Schwartz. Gays, AIDS, and You. 130 pages, paperback, $4.95. 1987. Order from the Devin Adair Company, 143 Sound Beach Avenue, Post Office Box A, Old Greenwich, Connecticut 06870, or from Our Lady's Book Service, Nazareth Homestead, R.D. 1, Box 258, Constable, New York 12926, telephone: 1-800-263-8160. The writers characterize AIDS as a "politically-protected plague," and show how society has disarmed itself against AIDS. The authors show how homosexuals are exploiting the virus for sympathy and as a coverup to pursue their own perverse goals. The homosexual movement refuses to call for chastity and it rejects any sort of morality, instead fervently hoping that the government will bail it out with some miracle cure. Meanwhile, they carelessly and recklessly endanger all of society.
"If [AIDS] research money is not forthcoming at a certain level by a certain date, all gay males should give blood. Whatever action is required to get national attention is valid. If that includes blood terrorism, so be it."
- Homosexual activist Robert Schwab, quoted in Kirk Kidwell. "Homosexuals Flex Muscle in Washington." American Family Association Journal, January 1988, pages 6 to 8.
"I think the time for violence has now arrived. I don't personally think I'm the guy with the guts to do it, but I'd like to see an AIDS terrorist army, like the Irgun which led to the state of Israel [the Irgun was a Zionist army originating in the mid-1930s, which slaughtered and maimed hundreds of women and children].
- Homosexual playwright Larry Kramer, founder of ACT-UP (the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power), in the Wall Street Journal, May 8, 1990.
"I think we should blow up Gracie Mansion [the New York governor's residence] ... One of my favorite notions is that we make fake blood and throw bottles of it in public places, and shout, "This is AIDS blood!" Let them think that it is. We have to scare people. We have to make their lives uncomfortable. I think we should be tying up whole cities. We should cripple this country. We should throw bombs. We should set fires. We should stop traffic. We should surround the White House."
- Larry Kramer, The Advocate, August 18, 1987. Also quoted in Kirk Kidwell. "Homosexuals Flex Muscle in Washington." American Family Association Journal, January 1988, pages 6 to 8.
"We're not here to make friends, we're here to raise the issues. We are an activist organization, and activism is fueled by anger, so people should not be surprised when that anger erupts in ways that not everyone approves of ... We have protests, which include taking over the opening plenary session of the AIDS conference in Montreal, blocking the Golden Gate Bridge, and protesting endlessly here in New York. We have telephone zaps where we tie up switchboards. We purchased millions of dollars of tickets when Northwest Airlines refused to carry AIDS people as passengers, tickets that weren't paid for, of course. Because we are gay people and have wonderful taste and can put on wonderful shows, our demonstrations are usually very theatrical ..."
- Larry Kramer, quoted in Time Magazine, February 5, 1989.
"We should have shut down the subway and burned down city hall. I think rioting is a valid tactic and should be tried ... If someone took out [killed] Jesse Helms or William Dannemeyer of California, I would be the first to stand up and applaud."
- ACT-UP member Michael Petrelis, quoted in Michael Willrich. "Uncivil Disobedience." Mother Jones. December 1990, page 16.
"It's hard to refrain from taking this man [Pat Buchanan] by the throat and squeezing as hard as you can while you look into his ugly, disgusting face and watch the eyeballs burst and pop out of their sockets. Or maybe you feel like stepping on his face and squishing his demented brain until the rot oozes out of it and onto the pavement. I have no problem with imagining violence against this wacko..."
- Michelangelo Signorile, editor-at-large of the homosexual magazine Outweek, quoted in National Review, June 24, 1991.
"At least in my ungoverned imagination I can fuck somebody without a rubber or I can, in the privacy of my own skull, douse [Senator Jesse] Helms with a bucket of gasoline and set his putrid ass on fire or throw [Congressman] William Dannemeyer off the Empire State Building ... [Cardinal John O'Connor] is the world's most active liar about condoms and safer-sex ... This fat cannibal from that house of walking swastikas up on Fifth Avenue should lose his church tax-exempt status and pay retroactive taxes from the last couple centuries. Shut down our clinics and we will shut down your church."
- AIDS-infected homosexual David Wojnarowicz, writing in an NEA-funded art catalog. Quoted in Congressman Dana Rorhabacher. "Congress Continues Funding Pornographic, Anti-Christian 'Art' With Tax Dollars." American Family Association Journal, January 1990, page 20. Also see "NEA Continues Funding Anti-Christian Art, Pornography With Tax Dollars." American Family Association Journal, May 1990, pages 1 and 13. Also see "Radical New York Homosexual Artist-Activist Sues AFA, Wildmon for $5,000,000." American Family Association Journal, July 1990, pages 1 and 22.
"I shall torture you during the daytime, and will keep you from a peaceful sleep at night."
- From Larry Kramer's open letter to New York Mayor Ed Koch, quoted in John Leo's "When Activism Becomes Gangsterism." U.S. News and World Report, February 5, 1990, page 18.
"Let's make the Christmas season miserable - block traffic, stink-bomb department stores, disable automated teller machines and book up flights to bring attention to AIDS. A lot of people are dying and there's a lot of inattention from the government. No major change occurs in society except through trauma and through catalysts."
- Spokesman for GRINCH (Gay Retaliation for Inexcusable Negligence and Criminal Homophobia), Columbus Dispatch, October 16, 1989.
"If we think, for instance, that HIV testing programs are wrong, and health officials are compiling data on people that they have no right to, I'm saying that a possibility might be to destroy files. Do I want to give anybody ideas? Sure!"
- Homosexual activist Andy Humm, New York City, The Advocate, September 29, 1987. Also quoted in Kirk Kidwell. "Homosexuals Flex Muscle in Washington." American Family Association Journal, January 1988, pages 6 and 8.
During Oregon's bitter 1992 fight over Ballot Measure 9, which would have prohibited local jurisdictions from enacting ordinances giving homosexuals special rights, the homosexuals repeatedly promised violence against supporters of Measure 9. Two of the flyers that were stapled to telephone poles all over Portland said;
"QUEER KNIVES QUEER GUNS
QUEER BULLETS QUEER MISSILES
QUEER TANKS QUEER TRENCHES
QUEER FIRE QUEER WARFARE
NO ON 9 IS A GOOD IDEA."
"VOTE NO ON 9 OR WE SHOOT THE FISH."
(picture of a Christian fish underneath the slogan).
The Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia was written by Brian Clowes, and published by American Life League.
|Chapter 117||Index||Chapter 119|
© Copyright 1998 American Life League.