Gays, Islam, Politics, School, Alfred Kinsey and the Queering of America
The Homosexual Agenda and the US Military
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
“At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot expect a full ‘appreciation’ or ‘understanding’ of homosexuality from the average American. 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…then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.” —From “The Overhauling of Straight America” November, 1987
“There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily.”—George Washington (1732-1799)
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”—George Orwell (1903-1950)
Grab your thinking cap Poindexter, as we are going to cover some territory on this one. The subjects in this article lend themselves to straying off in strange tangents, but I’ll do my best to keep on message.
At the end of its lame-duck session last year, the historically inept, treasonous, and corrupt 111th US Congress repealed DADT (Don’t Ask Don’t Tell). The acronym DADT is a misleading construct coined by a GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) friendly media. DADT was not merely about not asking, and not telling, it was a law that prohibited homosexuals from openly serving in the US armed forces. Link
The marginally less despicable 112th US Congress has carried on from where the 111th left off, and is moving ahead with the process of openly integrating homosexuals into the US military. Marines are already going through “gay sensitivity training,” and it was announced recently that Navy chaplains would wed gay couples (jumping the gun it appears—the decision was later reversed). Link Link
Why the rush? Why this extremely expensive and disruptive campaign to make the US military homosexually compliant, during tough economic times, and a world-wide war against Islamists? After all, homosexuals account for, at most, around 3% of the population. Link
It has been said that “the Left doesn’t look back”—and with good reason. If you had the blood-stained track record of god-awful screw-ups that the Far Left has, you wouldn’t look back either. Best to just stay in a state of denial and delusion—and they do. That the Far left (and to a lesser extent, the liberal) mental state is a dysfunctional, warped, and pathological weltanschauung, or world-view, is a given. Link
Just because the Far Left insists on lying about, twisting, or ignoring their past history, does not mean that “we the people” need to follow suit. On the contrary, we must become aware of the insidious path that the communists, fascists, and other Far Left collectivist regimes have followed, if we are to stand any chance of defeating their onslaught.
For the better part of the first half of the 20th century the left-wing intelligentsia promoted the racist teachings of eugenics, which championed the notion that biology was all important in determining one’s life. Margaret Sanger, the “sainted” founder of Planned Parenthood, endorsed eugenics, as did Adolf Hitler, who took notes on the subject from American Progressives. Link
After the Nazi atrocities of WWII became publicized, the Far Left decided that perhaps eugenics wasn’t such a swell idea after all, and they chose to try another tack—i.e. humans are not controlled by their biology, but by their environment. In a Homer Simpsonesque “Doh!” moment of revelation, they realized that such a stance was much more up their alley in the first place, as it ignores the “fallen” state of human nature, and posits an infinitely malleable human personality.
Just the thing for a Far Left collectivist agenda—be it communist, fascist, Nazi, or whatever. Radical feminists especially, latched onto the “it’s all caused by the environment” credo with a vengeance. Link
The Tabula Rasa
The idea that human beings are essentially blank slates (tabula rasa) upon which anything may be written, was perhaps most famously summarized by the words of psychologist John Watson, “Give me a dozen healthy infants…and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select‚Äîdoctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.” Link
Progressives from all sorts of different professions set out to prove that human personality was simply the product of their environment. Dr. Brown performed an experiment to prove his theory—with that trademark detached creepiness of his ilk. He and his partner found a nine-month-old little boy named Albert to perform their tests on.
First the baby was given various objects to play with, all of which he smiled at and enjoyed. Then Brown introduced a white rat, and at the same time made a loud bang behind Albert’s head. The little boy was of course alarmed, and started crying. Brown and his partner kept repeating the process, until eventually just the sight of a furry white rat would cause little Albert to cry.
Unfortunately, as the “New World Encyclopedia” reports, “[Little] Albert was taken from the hospital the day the last tests were made. Hence, the opportunity of developing an experimental technique for removing the conditioned emotional response was denied.” Yes…well, these things happen. Link
Be that as it may, after switching from “It’s all about biology!” (eugenics), to “It’s all about the environment!” (behaviorism), it appears that liberals have at long last decided to embrace the concept that human nature is the result of a combination of both nature (biology), and nurture (environment). (They sure took their sweet time at arriving at a conclusion that common sense should have pointed them toward from the start).
That’s great—liberals have finally discovered common sense, right? Well actually no, no they have not. What happened was; while the bulk of the Far Left continues to promote their “It’s all about the environment” behaviorism, there is one group that broke away from the herd, and in a glaring exception to the liberal status quo, declared that biology, not environment, was all important in their special case. That group is the homosexual activists.
Their thinking is; if the environment causes human nature, then if you change the environment, you might be able to change homosexual behavior (God forbid), or at least minimize its effects. So it is crucial to homosexual activists that they “prove” that homosexuality is the result of a biological imperative. Say hello to the “gay gene.”
Actually, before we say hello to the “gay gene,” allow me to give you a little back story on how homosexuality became culturally acceptable in the US—I’ll be brief.
There is no specific location, or personage, to designate as the one person or place that started the homosexual ball rolling in America—although John Maynard Keynes, and the proliferation of Keynesian economics throughout academia, starting with Harvard in the early 20th century, is certainly one person and place to start with. Link
Concerning the pederast Keynes, Zygmund Dobbs writes in “Keynes at Harvard” that “his condition was permanently ingrained and his philosophy was structured to consider homosexuality as superior, and the regular habits of the majority [i.e. heterosexuality] a boorish moral deficiency.” Link
Alfred Kinsey and the Queering of America
In any event, there is no doubt that the homosexual agenda got its first great boost from Dr. Alfred Kinsey—one time Harvard professor, homosexual pedophile, and all around sexual psychopath extraordinaire. You had best hide the women, children, men, and sheep, when Dr. Kinsey came to town. What a demented, dishonest, detestable human being. Link
Kinsey, of course, wrote the famous (infamous) “Kinsey Report” (“Sexual Behavior in the Human Male”), released in 1948. Dressed in his trademark white lab coat, he bamboozled America into taking as gospel his often slanted, and questionable findings. For example, some of his data about “the normal American male” came from questionnaires filled out by men in prison for sexually deviant crimes—you think that might have skewed his findings a teensy bit? Link
In a nutshell, Kinsey promoted the idea that homosexuality was natural, as was pedophilia, and bestiality. According to Kinsey, most American males were polymorphously perverse (a term first coined by Freud, and popularized by Herbert Marcuse in his 1955 book “Eros and Civilization”). Link
Polymorphous perversity is the “if it feels good do it” lifestyle and doctrine taken to the nth degree. Ultimately there are no sexual taboos whatsoever for the polymorphously perverse. To follow such a hedonistic doctrine (an atheistic doctrine need I add) is to be willingly led by the nose (or some other appendage) by an unconstrained libido. F—k everything. Link
Many homosexuals are polymorphously perverse, and we live in an increasingly perverse culture. Dr. Jeffrey Satinover observes that, “What we call the ‘gay life-style’ is in large measure a way of life constructed around unconstrained sexuality.” Link
Albert Mohler notes that “civilization cannot survive the triumph of the age of polymorphous perversity, because the idea of polymorphous sex is hopelessly incompatible with the very notion of civilization itself. Civilization is based upon order, respect, habit, custom, and institution—all of which are rejected outright by the age of polymorphous perversity.” Link
Yet here is the US military, a mainstay of American society, openly embracing the homosexual lifestyle. And lest you think that polymorphous perversity is hip, slick, and cool beyond words, permit me point out that psychopaths are often polymorphously perverse. Also, like many homosexuals, psychopaths often indulge in anal intercourse (as do many Muslim men with their wife, or wives—more about that shortly). Link
Kinsey lied and schmoozed his way across America using his oh-so-professional demeanor, white lab coat, and book full of fraudulent “science” to hoodwink a gullible populace into relaxing its attitudes and laws regarding sexuality in general, and homosexuality in particular. (The white lab coat doesn’t carry quite the panache it once did, do in no small part to frauds like Kinsey). Link
Homosexual Attacks on Psychology and Psychiatry
Another major victory for homosexuals was their successful 1973 attack on the American Psychiatric Association, or APA (although the American Psychological Assoc. has the same initials, I’ll be using them only in reference to the psychiatric association). By staging what was essentially a coup, a relatively small sub-set of homosexual activists within the APA managed to ensure that homosexuality was “normalized” by the association—against the wishes of almost 70% of its members. Link
As Dr. Jeffery Satinover writes in his book “Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth,” “How much the 1973 APA decision was motivated by politics is only becoming clear even now”—so much for empirical science. This was followed two years later by the American Psychological Association (at the time over three times as large a group as the APA) following suit. The “normalizing” of homosexuality within the professions of psychology and psychiatry has had far-reaching and deleterious effects on American culture. Links
Prior to 1973 homosexuality had been classified as a mental illness. It is not by happenstance that before homosexuality was normalized by the APA, narcissism was normalized. Homosexuality is by its very nature narcissistic. Satinover writes, “Narcissists were once deemed untreatable and unsuitable as analysts; now entire institutes of narcissists treat and train other narcissists.” Links
In a little over twenty years (1948-1973), homosexuality went from being an illegal mental illness, to being classified as a normal sexual activity, and a perfectly acceptable mental state. Not everyone has bought into the smoke and mirrors deception, however. Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, writing for NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) states, “the dark side of gay life—characterized by sexual addictions and fixations—keeps stubbornly emerging, in spite of public-relations efforts to submerge it. ...How long can psychologists be in denial about the significance of the dark side, and ignore what it implies about the homosexual condition?” Link Link
Another important year for homosexual activists was 1988. As David Kupelian documents in his book “The Marketing of Evil,” “In February 1988 some 175 leading activists representing homosexual groups from across the nation held a war conference in Warrenton, Virginia, to map out their movement’s future.” Link
Shortly afterward two attendees, a “Harvard educated researcher,” and another “with a doctorate in politics from Harvard,” wrote a book called “After the Ball”—a blueprint for a “long-term marketing campaign to sell ‚Äògay rights’ to straight America.” Kupelian observes that “‘After the Ball’ became the public-relations ‘Bible’ of the movement.” Link
The “push-back” by NARTH, and other groups or individuals is still a relatively small affair—but they are rapidly growing in influence and numbers. Perhaps, as Dobbs writes, “a thorough scientific re-evaluation of the motivations and the distortions of the founders of psycho-analysis as a “sick” movement is long overdue”—along with a re-evaluation of the pathology surrounding homosexuality. In any event, now that we have a bit of background to set the scene, let’s fast forward a bit to 1993, and the introduction of The Gay Gene. Link
The Gay Gene
As recounted by Dr. Satinover, the first “news” venue to announce the gay gene was NPR (National Public Radio). On July 15th, 1993 they announced the findings contained in an article to be published the next day in “Science” magazine. Satinover writes, “most laymen would have turned off the radio thinking that homosexuality is caused by a gene”—which, of course, was the intent. Link
The next day the “Wall Street Journal” of all places, jumped on the story like a duck on a junebug, and published an article titled “Research Points Toward a Gay Gene”—which was a gross misrepresentation of the truth, if not an outright lie. Link
The “New York Times” (of all places), was much more precise in its recounting of the story, and cautioned readers not to assume that the report might “mean anything as simplistic as that the ‘gay gene’ had been found.” Link
The brouhaha surrounding the “gay gene” was caused by research done by Dr. Dean Hamer (a gay geneticist). Dr. Satinover states that Hamer’s study was “seriously flawed.” In fairness to Dr. Hamer, I should mention that as far as I know, he never himself claimed to have found a “gay gene”—which, however, did not stop homosexual activists from taking the ball and running with it. Quite successfully I might add, as many Americans today believe that the “gay gene” is a reality. Link
The best that geneticists looking for a biological imperative behind homosexuality have been able to come up with, is the hypothesis that homosexuals are predisposed to homosexuality because of certain innate biological traits—in much the same way that a tall person may be predisposed to play basketball, or someone with an ear for music may be predisposed to become a musician. Even this hypothesis is far from being considered proven. In any event, there is no such thing as a gay gene. Link Link
(Sidebar: Allow me to step away from the main thread of this article for a moment, and make some observations of a personal nature.
The gay activists have tried their best to make homosexuals sympathetic, if not downright heroic figures in our culture, and on the other hand, they have effectively squashed dissenting opinions via the subtle brainwashing of political correctness, and brandishing the dreaded label “homophobic.” Better to be known as a necrophiliac, than a homophobe in our present culture. Link
Is it too late for me to say that I’m not homophobic? No doubt. Nevertheless, I am not a homophobe—that is, I do not hate homosexuals simply because they are homosexuals. I grew up in a town that the late author James Michener (who lived nearby) called a “homosexual capital.” I was raised to treat homosexuals with a “live and let live” attitude, and I retained that attitude most of my adult life—but no longer.
As I researched various elements of the Far Left for my articles, I kept running into homosexual connections, until eventually it became hard to tell if I was looking at a movement that attracted homosexuals, or a homosexual movement that attracted the Far Left. Be that as it may, there are a lot of homosexuals in the Far Left/NWO movement. The Far Left’s anti-God, anti-Christian, narcissistic, amoral, arrogant agenda aligns smoothly with that of militant homosexual activists.
Please keep in mind that I am using a large brush here, and there are a number of exceptions to the picture I have painted. For example, there are gays that love women, and most gays do not practice pederasty. No doubt there are a good many homosexuals involved in nice “Ozzie and Harriet” type relationships (or rather, “Ozzie and Ozzie” relationships). Nonetheless, there are a great number of homosexuals that are misogynistic narcissists, and whose lifestyles are reprehensible. Those involved in militant homosexual activism are generally of such a type.
The chief problem with “identity politics” is that sooner or later (with some groups sooner, rather than later) you run into a—holes. I could not care less what identity group they belong to, if a person is decent and respectful, I treat them with decency and respect in return; if they are a threat, a boor, or an idiot, I treat them accordingly. The left-wing “one size fits all” nonsense is nothing but lazy logic, infantile emoting, and cultural poison.
It is good to keep in mind that there is a vast difference between having had a homosexual experience, and being an active homosexual. For example, you can hardly fault the victim of prison rape, or child molestation for having had homosexual encounters.
Similarly, those who have had homosexual experiences because of ignorance or curiosity, and then changed their ways (which is the meaning of the word “repent”) are worthy of understanding and support—as are those who are sincerely trying to change their ways. In addition, I should mention that I strongly condemn any violence directed toward homosexuals, simply because they are homosexual.
That being said, I am vehemently opposed to the gay agenda of promoting polymorphous perversity, pederasty, and gay marriage. I am totally and deeply against the queering of the US military, and I am way past being sick and tired of the pro-homosexual, anti-Christian slant expressed in the various “news” venues.
My attitude toward homosexuals has followed along the same path it did when I researched Islam—from “live and let live,” to concern, to alarm, to passionate opposition. Hey, don’t blame me; I’m not the one with the arrogant, anti-American, perverse, misogynistic beliefs and attitudes. End of sidebar.)
Homosexuality and Politics
Homosexuality is opposed to natural law, the way things are intended to be. If the idea of males and females being made for each other seems befuddling; I suggest that you go grab yourself a nut and bolt and play with them for awhile—perhaps a light will dawn for you, perhaps not. The United States of America was founded on the principles of “the laws of nature and of nature’s God,” and that is the nation I fight to defend—and no other. Link
Homosexuals generally have little or no interest in children (aside from those who regard them as sexual toys), and therefore are naturally aligned with the Far Left’s death cult. Their narcissistic lack of concern for future generations is evidenced by the economic suicide run America is currently on. Link
Not for nothing did “National Review” senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru name his book about abortion and Democrats “The Party of Death.” Here’s a catchy political slogan for you: “Democrats—the Party of Debt, Death, and Destruction.” As far as slogans go it’s a catchy meme, but it is perhaps too blatantly honest to become popular. Link
I mustn’t forget to mention the anemic, rootless Republican Party, which is hardly as pure as the driven snow. Both the Democratic and Republican parties are infested with corruption, greed, and anti-American one-world globalists, of one persuasion or another—Beltway Bubble boys and girls doing their best to get their share, “while the gettin’s good,” and the golden goose of the United States still has some meat left on her to carve off. Link
Robin of Berkeley, who used to be a card carrying leftist, knows full well the misogynistic reality of the Far Left, and feels that the queering of the US military is a terrible mistake. It would amount to force-feeding a disease into America’s system. Link Link
The misogynistic nature of the Far Left; in fact their entire mental pathology, is perhaps nowhere better explained in layman’s terms, than in Dr. Jamie Glazov’s book “United in Hate: The Left’s Romance With Tyranny and Terror.” Since misogyny and homosexuality often go hand in hand, it is important to understand the misogynistic nature of various Islamic cultures if we are to grasp some of the dynamics involved between Progressive homosexuals and radical Islam. Link
As America has been actively fighting Islamists for some time now, and the US military is in the process of queering the armed forces, this topic is of some importance. There are any number of examples of how various Islamic cultures keep women psychologically shackled and marginalized—from full body burkas, to beatings, to whippings, to “honor killings” and rape. For the sake of simplicity I’ll limit my discussion to FGM (Female Genital Mutilation)—a so called “female circumcision,” in which part of a young girl’s female genitals are cut off. Link
Dr. Glazov informs us that “how much is amputated varies among cultures. In Egypt only the clitoris is amputated; in countries like Sudan the woman haters are not so kind. In a savagery known as infibulation, the girl’s external genital organs are completely removed….” I will spare you the specifics. Link
Glazov continues, “More than 130 million women living today [billions dead and gone] have suffered through this horrifying practice, and more than two million girls face assault by it each year…. Many girls lose their lives during FGM, which is often done with broken glass. Most victims suffer from chronic infection and pain for the rest of their lives.” Link
The fact that a number of girls die while being forced to undergo this barbaric procedure is of little concern to most Muslim men, as in many places women are considered “less worthy than cows and sheep.” Link
It is indeed puzzling that the same feminazis who go into a frothing hissy fit over such things as Madison Avenue’s “objectifying” of women, seem to be perfectly okay with genital mutilation being performed on approximately 5,000 Muslim girls every day. Odd—makes you wonder. Link
I suppose that they simply do not deem little girls as being something worthy of their attention. That, and the fact that the insidious, idiotic concepts of moral and cultural relativism dictate that they hold no opinion at all regarding the relative benefits, value, and desirability of various cultures over one another—excepting the liberal leit motif that Western civilization is always very, very bad. Link
If American women understood, really understood, just how debased and hard life is for many Muslim women, there would be a lot more Ann Barnhardts in this country, and a lot fewer Joy Behars. Links Links
(Sidebar: Pastor Terry Jones would also have a lot more supporters. He has been painted as a right-wing loon by the various propaganda outlets (“news” media), but he is one courageous fellow who has taken his pro-Christian/anti-Muslim message right into the heart of America’s “enemy territory” (Dearbornistan , Michigan). Although I would not take the comparison very far, he brings to mind John Brown in the time prior to the Civil War. Will Dearborn turn out to be the new Harpers Ferry?) Link Link
Islam and Homosexuality
Dr. Peter Raddatz observes of Islam that “Being legitimized religiously, male dominance…condemns not only women as an animal-like existence, but also their sexual organ as a despicable opening…. Therefore the anus is preferred to the vagina to an extent that has raised the attention of UN institutions and secular Muslim scientists. Anal intercourse appears as an unusually common practice, and corresponding hospital reports often indicate brutal extremes in which terrible injuries have been inflicted in this area. This puts more light, clearly, on the alleged rejection of homosexuality in Islam.” Link
“The alleged rejection of homosexuality in Islam….” Dr. Raddatz says “alleged,” because homosexuality, while being publicly condemned, is privately rampant in certain Islamic cultures. How could it be otherwise in such a misogynistic culture? Link
Glazov notes that “A deafening silence surrounds this mass cultural pathology.” Can you say “cognitive dissonance?” Glazov writes, “Indeed, the hatred of female sexuality is directly connected to the widespread practice of homosexuality in this culture, which…is simultaneously demonized and denied.” (Yes, I know that sharia law forbids homosexuality, and hands out death sentences for homosexual behavior—nonetheless, homosexuality is actively practiced in a number of Muslim cultures, with an emphasis on pedophilia and pederasty). Link Link
The peculiar spectacle of homosexuals supporting a religion that, at least publicly, hates them, is beyond bizarre. Whether such groups as QUIT (Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism) are indicative of “yet another dark reflection of the suicidal impulse” at the heart of the Far Left, or stem from a “nod and a wink” acknowledgement of Islam’s misogynistic tendencies, is a matter for debate. Link
I realize that the PC police will not permit us to admit that the US is at war with radical Islam, but does opening the gates of our military to homosexuals, while we are in a de facto war with an enemy rife with closet queers, seem like a smart move to you? Link
Homosexuals as Power Elites
Why does the push to queer the US military find so little opposition and such vocal support in Washington? Is it that the Power Elites are so riddled with homosexuals? Is it that the higher levels of government have a disproportionate share of homosexuals; way out of line with the nation’s norm? Is it that the various news media have a disproportionate share of homosexuals as well, and that they push the gay agenda for all its worth? Link Link Link
I suspect that it is all the above, and then some. Homosexuals have a sense of self-preservation after all, and when you are such a small percentage of the overall population, it behooves you to have as many like-minded fellows move into positions of power as possible. It is a no-brainer really, and I am sure it is a process that has been clandestinely going on for quite some time. Link Link
Gays and the Nazis
I’m not opposed to gays in the military because I think that they lack machismo (if you are under the delusion that all gays are effeminate, think again)—after all, the ranks of Hitler’s brown-shirted thugs were riddled with homosexuals. On the “Night of the Long Knives,” Hitler had homosexual Ernest R√∂hm, head of the brown shirt SA (Sturmabteilung—storm troopers), and a number of his aides murdered by the SS (SchutzStaffel—Protective Echelon). Typical Far Left back stabbing. Link Link
For those of you still unaware that the Nazis were (are) a Far Left phenomenon, I suggest that you get yourself up to speed quickly, lest you continue to fall prey to such lies as “The American Nazi Party, and other groups of their ilk are right-wing organizations.” They are not, and never have been—even if their rank and file remains clueless. For an excellent in-depth look at homosexuality in the Far Left’s Nazi Party, check out “The Pink Swastika.” Link Link Link
Gay Health Risks
I am opposed to gays in the military because I have no doubt that they would comprise a huge security risk due to their affinity for left-wing causes, and because their presence would be highly disruptive and detrimental to unit cohesion, moral, and fighting effectiveness, and because their presence in our armed forces flies in the face of well over two hundred years of hallowed tradition, and because their lifestyle finds a harmonic echo in various Islamic cultures, and because their acceptance into the military would lead to a similar acceptance by society at large (I believe that such an acceptance would be social/cultural suicide), and finally, because of the health risks homosexuals pose. Link
Dr. Satinover reports “...the gay male life span, even apart from AIDS and with a long-term partner, is significantly shorter than that of married men in general by more than three decades. AIDS further shortens the life span of homosexual men by more than 7%”
A twenty to thirty year shorter life span than average…. Liberals went ballistic over the fact that tobacco use shortens a person’s life by less than ten years on average, yet homosexuality is being promoted in our schools and culture, instead of being shown for the mentally perverse, life shortening lifestyle that it is. It is worse than passing out cigarettes to elementary school students in order to get them hooked. (The spiritual implications of, and Judeo/Christian injunctions against homosexuality will not be addressed in this article, as they deserve more space than I can give them here). Link Link
Homosexuality in Our Schools
Diane Schneider, representing the National Education Association (NEA), recently told a UN group that comprehensive sex education is “the only way to combat heterosexism and gender conformity, and we must make these issues a part of every middle and high-school student’s agenda.” Ms. Schneider also proclaimed that those opposed to homosexuality “are stuck in a binary box that religion and family create.” Link
I have her “binary box” hanging. Unfortunately Schneider’s attitude is all too common among America’s teachers. As an article on the “Mission America” website points out, “If your son or daughter is learning standard sex education at school, chances are excellent that he or she has absorbed this idea: that HIV is “everyone’s disease” and that just about anyone can get it. It’s simply not true. ...In spite of what you may have heard, male homosexual sex has consistently been the single biggest “transmission mode” for HIV in the U.S. HIV attributed to male-to-male sexual contact rose from 50% of all the HIV cases in 2006, to 56% in 2009.” Link
Kupelian writes, “In truth, there is something wrong with homosexuality. Simply put, it is unnatural and self-destructive—just as Western civilization has long understood it.” He goes on to note that “gay rights; are…not about rights. It’s about redefining truth and censoring all criticism so that militant homosexuals can be comfortable in their ‘lifestyle’ without having to be disturbed by reality.” Link
Given the known affinity of homosexuals for the Far Left, the danger they pose as a health risk, the socially destructive effects of polymorphous perversity, and the collusion between the Far Left, Islam, and homosexuals; the idea of having the US military welcoming homosexuals with open arms is simply insane. (I should mention that there are a handful of stalwart patriotic congressmen trying to derail the homosexual juggernaut). Link Link
Why in the world is the US military rolling over and playing dead regarding the queering of the armed forces? Is the Pentagon that full of homosexuals, or are they simply too frightened of crossing swords with the PC police—or both? I researched this subject on my own, and I had no trouble accessing pertinent data. Are we supposed to believe that the Pentagon is incapable of similar due diligence before turning over the reins of the armed forces to queers? Link Link
Make no mistake; once homosexuals have “their nose inside the tent,” the US military will become one of the most homo-friendly environments in the country. Just the place for folks like Wikileaks hero Bradley Manning to take root and flourish—but that’s the plan, is it not? Link Link