Gay rights and the truth
anti homo | 27.04.2003 22:15
Gay rights and the truth
Homosexuality is NOT Natural
"'Fisting' or 'handballing' is the ... practice of inserting an entire lubricated hand and forearm into the anus of a partner. This practice, as well as repeated anal sodomy, soon leads to enlarging, slackening, or tearing of the anal sphincter muscles. Afflicted homosexuals end up having to wear a diaper to catch the ... dribbling of anal secretions."[G395] (I have yet to see animals do this to each other)
"for the end of humanity in respect of sexuality is to preserve the species WITHOUT DEBASING THE PERSON; but in this instance the species is not being preserved.... but the person is set aside, the self is degraded below the level of the animals, and humanity is dishonoured." --Immanuel Kant.
Animal Behaviour
For those who believe that animals display homosexual behaviour and that we, therefore, should legitimise and recognise such behaviour as natural, I must point out that "[Supposed 'homosexual activity'] has been noticed most often among young males. Usually one of the larger, more powerful and aggressive males mounts a smaller, younger, and more submissive partner." [W30] This, it should be noted, is analogous to the paedophilic molestation of young boys by older males. Does this make it natural? Should we legalise such behaviour because of such an example? Does the fact that "dog's do it" mean that "we should do it"? Many homosexuals, NAMBLA members, apparently agree.
Nevertheless, many researchers have pointed out that such behaviour is uncommon, is intended to enforce hierarchy (like in prison), or that, because the animal differs so much from human-kind, cannot be qualitatively the same as homosexual behaviour.
There is a very large gap between animals and man. Most people are not the blind followers of instinctive drives like animals, but instead have some option in whether or not to follow them. Moreover, the confused behaviour of the occasional dog bears little relationship to the homosexual culture and lifestyle.
"In many species, the threatening or aggressive behaviour which maintains safety, status, and territory appears indistinguishable from male courtship behaviour. Both forms of conduct involve the same gestures, rituals, and modes of attack [44]."[W30]
"Homosexual behaviour has never been the main choice, or even a customary minor part of the sexual pattern, of any mammal living in the free state. The occasional mounting of male animals by other males --apes in particular-- is not true homosexuality but is in part playful and learning behaviour in the immature, and in part a way of avoiding violent fighting between two males [dominant bouts]."[45]
"Beach [65] disposes of the entire argument in a 1971 interview: 'I don't know any authenticated instance of males or females in the animal world preferring a homosexual partner --if by homosexual you mean complete sexual relations, including climax.... Its questionable that mounting in itself can properly be called sexual.'"[S34]
The modern consensus is that "preferential homosexuality is not found naturally in any infra-human mammalian species." W. Gadpaille (Archives of General Psychiatry, 1980)
Genetic Determination
There have been some who have tried to legitimise homosexuality as being genetically determined. Kallman[38,39], a researcher trying to find a genetic basis, compared identical twins and their resulting "sexual orientation." He used heterosexual twins as a control groups and found what he apparently set out to find --that if one of the twins was homosexual, so was the other.
Unfortunately "So far, in spite of the great scientific interest of this issue, no one has been able to stage a repetition of this research,"[W169] and "Kallman's finding run directly counter to all the evidence demonstrating the importance of upbringing in producing homosexuality." Further research, such as Lange[40], Rainer et. al [41], Klintworth [42], and Parker [43], have produced "[b]etter verified examples of identical twins differing in sexual orientation."[W170]
"...the possibility of [molestation should not] be overlooked. If several brothers are affected, this may be the result, not of hereditary defect, but of one brother having introduced the others to perverse practices."[W167]
Another problem is that of the fact that identical twins are likely raised in the same home --and subject to the same environmental influences (bad parenting) as they grow up.
In spite of his clear interest in promoting the homosexual "genetic" basis, Kallman noted that this area of research is "not a promising field of exploration for research workers who are in any way anxious for their conventional peace of mind... the problems and attitudes of a sexually aberrant group look less wholesome in the twilight of gloomy hiding places than they do from the perspective of an ornamental desk or from a comfortable therapeutic couch."[W168]
Other researchers, trying to come up with a genetic model have done all sorts of things to rats and other creatures --doping them up with drugs, and messing around with hormones, until these creatures have no idea what they are --or what they're doing. If homosexuals feel that their condition bears a relationship to that of such thoroughly messed up creatures --they are welcome to that belief.
Jeffrey Santinover, MD, in his book "Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth," (Baker Books, 1996) argues that complex behaviours, such as "sexual orientation" are in part innate, and in part social...
"He argues convincingly that the more complex behaviours, including sexual orientation, must be the result of a network of interactions involving several biological factors and those of the social environment, beginning with the family. Consider the case of your favourite basketball player: Only the right genes make possible the requisite height and agility, but lacking a society to nurture the child, invent the game, and prompt the desire to play, there will be no basketball player."[96]
"Santinover summarises:"
My primary aim in part one has been to demonstrate that hard science is far from providing an explanation of homosexuality, let alone one that reduces it to genetic determinism. My purpose so far, thus, will have been well served if the discussion helps to guard against the grossly over-blown claims of interest groups who misuse science for political ends. As we have seen in the case of homosexuality, for all the public fanfare, science has accomplished nothing we did not know from common sense: One's character traits are in part innate but are subject to modification by experience and choice.
"Gay sympathisers struggle frantically to find evidence that homosexuality is 'genetic' because so many of us thoughtlessly accept the idea that there can be no condemnation of any behaviour that is natural... [But it] is in our nature to be attracted to behaviour we know to be wrong, be it greed, gluttony, lust, or any of the others. The meaning of the moral life lies in the struggle to resist temptations that are entirely natural.... Homosexuality (of which there are so many variations it is better to speak of "the homosexualities") differs from the many other temptations only in affecting so central a part of the self. The ability to find sexual satisfaction only with one of the same sex becomes characteristic in some people by the same process as do other traits that define the individual. It is a process in which we follow our inclinations until they become habitual, possibly even producing actual physical changes in the brain. It does not involve choice in the easy sense of choosing between chocolate and vanilla."[96]
"Homosexuality is not innate. There is no connection between sexual instinct and the selection of sexual object,[77,78] nor can any chemical imbalance determine the kind of partner preferred for sexual intercourse. Such selection is learned, acquired behaviour; there is no inevitable genetic or hormonal inborn propensity toward a partner of either the same or opposite sex. However, the male-female design[78] is exemplified to the child from birth and culturally ingrained through the marital order. This design is anatomically determined, as it derives from cells which in the evolutionary scale underwent changes into organ systems and finally into individuals reciprocally adapted to each other. This is the evolutionary development of man. The male-female design is thus perpetually maintained, and only overwhelming fear can disturb or divert it."[s99]
"I have never come across anyone with 'innate homosexuality.' That notion has been a long-proclaimed gay-activist political position, intended to promote the acceptance of homosexuality as a healthy, fully equal, alternative expression of human sexuality. It has zero scientific foundation though its promoters latch on to even the flimsiest shreds of atrocious research in their attempts to justify the notion." Toronto Professor of Psychiatry, Joseph Berger (Letter, Globe and Mail, Feb 26, 1992).
The Molestation Connection
It is also a technique for the promotion of adult-child sexual relations. Ascribing any kind of sexuality to children provides the molester with an excuse. He can say "I was helping that child realise his full previously 'innate' sexual potential, I was liberating him from the oppression of his heterosexual parents, I was teaching him how to relate to others with his sexuality, I was providing him with 'solace' and 'tolerance', and so on."
Remember: Once you accept that children are sexual beings, you have accepted the notion that it is okay for them to have sex, especially with more experienced (and therefore more "gentle") adults.
"As the great expounders of natural law explained, we do not make our way to the 'natural' simply by generalising on the mixed record of our species: by that reckoning, incest and genocide [and killing homosexuals] would be in accord with natural law, since they seem to form an intractable part of the human experience. And even if we could show, say, that some of us carried a gene for 'arson,' that would not settle the moral question on arson. We might not be as quick to blame the bearers of these genes, but we would expect them to exert more self-control, and we would hardly waive our moral reservations about arson."[7]
A "genetic preference" for sweets cannot compare to a bad home environment, or, worse, homosexual molestation. And all of these, ultimately, are nothing more than influences --which we can choose to follow or suppress. While it is clear that environment plays a clear role in encouraging certain impulses, the following of those impulses is ultimately determined by character and moral-integrity --in other words, by the choices we make.
Conclusion
"[The issue] cannot be resolved 'scientifically' by, for example, the finding of a gene that disposes a person to homosexual desire. Whether the behaviour in question is homosexuality, alcoholism, or violence, a finding of biological disposition does not require or justify acting on that disposition."[6] Of course, no such finding has occurred: "...no one has ever found a single replicable genetic, hormonal, or chemical difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals.[54]"[G366]
But the fact that one is more likely to do these things when an environmental influence is present is reason enough for us to consider it --not in excusing homosexuality or pretending it to be "natural"-- but in deriving a way of eliminating the phenomenon among our young. Homosexuals, as has been shown above, go through great lengths to influence our children, and it is our absolute RIGHT to fight-back against such intrusions in the sphere of parental guidance, not just for ourselves --but for the health of our society.
"... we have a right ... to teach and counsel the children of others" -Roberta Achtenberg, lesbian rights activist[3]. Her right ends, where our family begins. It is time to make the protection of our young our business.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexuality is NOT Natural
G. William Gairdner, "The War Against the Family a parent speaks out" (Toronto Stoddart, 1992). An excellent overview of the liberal agenda and aims by a Stanford professor of philosophy.
W. D.J. West, "Homosexuality" (Chicago Aldine, 1968). An excellent summary of pre-1973 research although, even at that time, experts regularly gave in to homosexual pressure on the child-molestation issue.
44 Tinbergen, N. (1964) "Aggression and fears in the normal sexual behaviour of some animals." In Rose, I. [Ed.] The Pathology and Treatment of Sexual Deviation. London, Oxford University Press.
45 Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual Behaviour in the 1970s. Chicago Playboy Press. p.299.
65 Karlen, A. (1971). "Sexuality and Homosexuality." New York Norton.
S. Charles W. Socarides, M.D., "Homosexuality Psychoanalytic Therapy" (New Jersey Jason Aronson, 1989). A book detailing the psychoanalytic understanding of homosexuality, based firmly on the (Freudian) psychoanalytic tradition. This book includes some typical cases, and techniques of curing this maladaption.
38 Kallman, F.J. (1952) "Comparative twin study of the genetic aspects of male homosexuality." Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 115, 283-298.
39 Kallman, F.J. (1952) "Twin sibships and the study of male homosexuality." American Journal of Human Genetics, 4, 136-146.
40 Lange, J. (1930) "Crime as Destiny A Study of Criminal Twins (translated). London, Allen and Unwin.
41 Rainer, J.D., et al. (1960) "Homosexuality and heterosexuality in identical twins." Psychosomatic Medicine, 21, 251-258.
42 Klintworth, G.K. (1962) "A pair of male monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality." Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 135, 113-125.
43 Parker, N. (1964) "Homosexuality in twins; a report on three discordant pairs." British Journal of Psychiatry, 40, 489-495.
96 E.L. Pattulo, To Cure or Not to Cure, National Review, Sept 30, 1996.
77 Freud, S. "Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality" (1905). "Complete Psychological Works", vol. 7, pp. 125-244.
78 Rado, Sandor. "An Adaptational View of Sexual Behaviour," in "Psychosexual Development in Health and Disease". Hoch, P., and Zubin, J., eds. N.Y. Grune and Stratton, 1949, pp.159-189.
s. Charles W. Socarides, M.D., "Beyond Sexual Freedom" (New York Quadrangle, 1975). An overview of modern societal degeneration, including chapters on feminism, group-sex, communal living, pornography, homosexuality, and sex-mutilation surgery.
7 Hadley Arkes, "The Closet Straight," July 5, 1993. A response to gay editor of New Republic, Andrew Sullivan's "The Politics of Homosexuality," New Republic, May 10. More brilliant arguments.
6 Richard John Neuhaus, "Table for One," Dec 13, 1993. A review of homosexual Bruces Bawer's "A Place at the Table The Gay Individual in American Society." Contains many brilliant arguments.
54 J. Marmor, ed., "Homosexual Behaviour A Modern Reappraisal (New York Basic Books, 1980), cited in Brad Hayton, "The Homosexual Agenda Issues and Arguments" (Colorado Springs Focus on the Family, 1990), p.13.
3 Rich Lowry, "Roberta On a Rampage," May 2, 1994. An article on the antics of lesbian activist Roberta Achtenburg.
"'Fisting' or 'handballing' is the ... practice of inserting an entire lubricated hand and forearm into the anus of a partner. This practice, as well as repeated anal sodomy, soon leads to enlarging, slackening, or tearing of the anal sphincter muscles. Afflicted homosexuals end up having to wear a diaper to catch the ... dribbling of anal secretions."[G395] (I have yet to see animals do this to each other)
"for the end of humanity in respect of sexuality is to preserve the species WITHOUT DEBASING THE PERSON; but in this instance the species is not being preserved.... but the person is set aside, the self is degraded below the level of the animals, and humanity is dishonoured." --Immanuel Kant.
Animal Behaviour
For those who believe that animals display homosexual behaviour and that we, therefore, should legitimise and recognise such behaviour as natural, I must point out that "[Supposed 'homosexual activity'] has been noticed most often among young males. Usually one of the larger, more powerful and aggressive males mounts a smaller, younger, and more submissive partner." [W30] This, it should be noted, is analogous to the paedophilic molestation of young boys by older males. Does this make it natural? Should we legalise such behaviour because of such an example? Does the fact that "dog's do it" mean that "we should do it"? Many homosexuals, NAMBLA members, apparently agree.
Nevertheless, many researchers have pointed out that such behaviour is uncommon, is intended to enforce hierarchy (like in prison), or that, because the animal differs so much from human-kind, cannot be qualitatively the same as homosexual behaviour.
There is a very large gap between animals and man. Most people are not the blind followers of instinctive drives like animals, but instead have some option in whether or not to follow them. Moreover, the confused behaviour of the occasional dog bears little relationship to the homosexual culture and lifestyle.
"In many species, the threatening or aggressive behaviour which maintains safety, status, and territory appears indistinguishable from male courtship behaviour. Both forms of conduct involve the same gestures, rituals, and modes of attack [44]."[W30]
"Homosexual behaviour has never been the main choice, or even a customary minor part of the sexual pattern, of any mammal living in the free state. The occasional mounting of male animals by other males --apes in particular-- is not true homosexuality but is in part playful and learning behaviour in the immature, and in part a way of avoiding violent fighting between two males [dominant bouts]."[45]
"Beach [65] disposes of the entire argument in a 1971 interview: 'I don't know any authenticated instance of males or females in the animal world preferring a homosexual partner --if by homosexual you mean complete sexual relations, including climax.... Its questionable that mounting in itself can properly be called sexual.'"[S34]
The modern consensus is that "preferential homosexuality is not found naturally in any infra-human mammalian species." W. Gadpaille (Archives of General Psychiatry, 1980)
Genetic Determination
There have been some who have tried to legitimise homosexuality as being genetically determined. Kallman[38,39], a researcher trying to find a genetic basis, compared identical twins and their resulting "sexual orientation." He used heterosexual twins as a control groups and found what he apparently set out to find --that if one of the twins was homosexual, so was the other.
Unfortunately "So far, in spite of the great scientific interest of this issue, no one has been able to stage a repetition of this research,"[W169] and "Kallman's finding run directly counter to all the evidence demonstrating the importance of upbringing in producing homosexuality." Further research, such as Lange[40], Rainer et. al [41], Klintworth [42], and Parker [43], have produced "[b]etter verified examples of identical twins differing in sexual orientation."[W170]
"...the possibility of [molestation should not] be overlooked. If several brothers are affected, this may be the result, not of hereditary defect, but of one brother having introduced the others to perverse practices."[W167]
Another problem is that of the fact that identical twins are likely raised in the same home --and subject to the same environmental influences (bad parenting) as they grow up.
In spite of his clear interest in promoting the homosexual "genetic" basis, Kallman noted that this area of research is "not a promising field of exploration for research workers who are in any way anxious for their conventional peace of mind... the problems and attitudes of a sexually aberrant group look less wholesome in the twilight of gloomy hiding places than they do from the perspective of an ornamental desk or from a comfortable therapeutic couch."[W168]
Other researchers, trying to come up with a genetic model have done all sorts of things to rats and other creatures --doping them up with drugs, and messing around with hormones, until these creatures have no idea what they are --or what they're doing. If homosexuals feel that their condition bears a relationship to that of such thoroughly messed up creatures --they are welcome to that belief.
Jeffrey Santinover, MD, in his book "Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth," (Baker Books, 1996) argues that complex behaviours, such as "sexual orientation" are in part innate, and in part social...
"He argues convincingly that the more complex behaviours, including sexual orientation, must be the result of a network of interactions involving several biological factors and those of the social environment, beginning with the family. Consider the case of your favourite basketball player: Only the right genes make possible the requisite height and agility, but lacking a society to nurture the child, invent the game, and prompt the desire to play, there will be no basketball player."[96]
"Santinover summarises:"
My primary aim in part one has been to demonstrate that hard science is far from providing an explanation of homosexuality, let alone one that reduces it to genetic determinism. My purpose so far, thus, will have been well served if the discussion helps to guard against the grossly over-blown claims of interest groups who misuse science for political ends. As we have seen in the case of homosexuality, for all the public fanfare, science has accomplished nothing we did not know from common sense: One's character traits are in part innate but are subject to modification by experience and choice.
"Gay sympathisers struggle frantically to find evidence that homosexuality is 'genetic' because so many of us thoughtlessly accept the idea that there can be no condemnation of any behaviour that is natural... [But it] is in our nature to be attracted to behaviour we know to be wrong, be it greed, gluttony, lust, or any of the others. The meaning of the moral life lies in the struggle to resist temptations that are entirely natural.... Homosexuality (of which there are so many variations it is better to speak of "the homosexualities") differs from the many other temptations only in affecting so central a part of the self. The ability to find sexual satisfaction only with one of the same sex becomes characteristic in some people by the same process as do other traits that define the individual. It is a process in which we follow our inclinations until they become habitual, possibly even producing actual physical changes in the brain. It does not involve choice in the easy sense of choosing between chocolate and vanilla."[96]
"Homosexuality is not innate. There is no connection between sexual instinct and the selection of sexual object,[77,78] nor can any chemical imbalance determine the kind of partner preferred for sexual intercourse. Such selection is learned, acquired behaviour; there is no inevitable genetic or hormonal inborn propensity toward a partner of either the same or opposite sex. However, the male-female design[78] is exemplified to the child from birth and culturally ingrained through the marital order. This design is anatomically determined, as it derives from cells which in the evolutionary scale underwent changes into organ systems and finally into individuals reciprocally adapted to each other. This is the evolutionary development of man. The male-female design is thus perpetually maintained, and only overwhelming fear can disturb or divert it."[s99]
"I have never come across anyone with 'innate homosexuality.' That notion has been a long-proclaimed gay-activist political position, intended to promote the acceptance of homosexuality as a healthy, fully equal, alternative expression of human sexuality. It has zero scientific foundation though its promoters latch on to even the flimsiest shreds of atrocious research in their attempts to justify the notion." Toronto Professor of Psychiatry, Joseph Berger (Letter, Globe and Mail, Feb 26, 1992).
The Molestation Connection
It is also a technique for the promotion of adult-child sexual relations. Ascribing any kind of sexuality to children provides the molester with an excuse. He can say "I was helping that child realise his full previously 'innate' sexual potential, I was liberating him from the oppression of his heterosexual parents, I was teaching him how to relate to others with his sexuality, I was providing him with 'solace' and 'tolerance', and so on."
Remember: Once you accept that children are sexual beings, you have accepted the notion that it is okay for them to have sex, especially with more experienced (and therefore more "gentle") adults.
"As the great expounders of natural law explained, we do not make our way to the 'natural' simply by generalising on the mixed record of our species: by that reckoning, incest and genocide [and killing homosexuals] would be in accord with natural law, since they seem to form an intractable part of the human experience. And even if we could show, say, that some of us carried a gene for 'arson,' that would not settle the moral question on arson. We might not be as quick to blame the bearers of these genes, but we would expect them to exert more self-control, and we would hardly waive our moral reservations about arson."[7]
A "genetic preference" for sweets cannot compare to a bad home environment, or, worse, homosexual molestation. And all of these, ultimately, are nothing more than influences --which we can choose to follow or suppress. While it is clear that environment plays a clear role in encouraging certain impulses, the following of those impulses is ultimately determined by character and moral-integrity --in other words, by the choices we make.
Conclusion
"[The issue] cannot be resolved 'scientifically' by, for example, the finding of a gene that disposes a person to homosexual desire. Whether the behaviour in question is homosexuality, alcoholism, or violence, a finding of biological disposition does not require or justify acting on that disposition."[6] Of course, no such finding has occurred: "...no one has ever found a single replicable genetic, hormonal, or chemical difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals.[54]"[G366]
But the fact that one is more likely to do these things when an environmental influence is present is reason enough for us to consider it --not in excusing homosexuality or pretending it to be "natural"-- but in deriving a way of eliminating the phenomenon among our young. Homosexuals, as has been shown above, go through great lengths to influence our children, and it is our absolute RIGHT to fight-back against such intrusions in the sphere of parental guidance, not just for ourselves --but for the health of our society.
"... we have a right ... to teach and counsel the children of others" -Roberta Achtenberg, lesbian rights activist[3]. Her right ends, where our family begins. It is time to make the protection of our young our business.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexuality is NOT Natural
G. William Gairdner, "The War Against the Family a parent speaks out" (Toronto Stoddart, 1992). An excellent overview of the liberal agenda and aims by a Stanford professor of philosophy.
W. D.J. West, "Homosexuality" (Chicago Aldine, 1968). An excellent summary of pre-1973 research although, even at that time, experts regularly gave in to homosexual pressure on the child-molestation issue.
44 Tinbergen, N. (1964) "Aggression and fears in the normal sexual behaviour of some animals." In Rose, I. [Ed.] The Pathology and Treatment of Sexual Deviation. London, Oxford University Press.
45 Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual Behaviour in the 1970s. Chicago Playboy Press. p.299.
65 Karlen, A. (1971). "Sexuality and Homosexuality." New York Norton.
S. Charles W. Socarides, M.D., "Homosexuality Psychoanalytic Therapy" (New Jersey Jason Aronson, 1989). A book detailing the psychoanalytic understanding of homosexuality, based firmly on the (Freudian) psychoanalytic tradition. This book includes some typical cases, and techniques of curing this maladaption.
38 Kallman, F.J. (1952) "Comparative twin study of the genetic aspects of male homosexuality." Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 115, 283-298.
39 Kallman, F.J. (1952) "Twin sibships and the study of male homosexuality." American Journal of Human Genetics, 4, 136-146.
40 Lange, J. (1930) "Crime as Destiny A Study of Criminal Twins (translated). London, Allen and Unwin.
41 Rainer, J.D., et al. (1960) "Homosexuality and heterosexuality in identical twins." Psychosomatic Medicine, 21, 251-258.
42 Klintworth, G.K. (1962) "A pair of male monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality." Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 135, 113-125.
43 Parker, N. (1964) "Homosexuality in twins; a report on three discordant pairs." British Journal of Psychiatry, 40, 489-495.
96 E.L. Pattulo, To Cure or Not to Cure, National Review, Sept 30, 1996.
77 Freud, S. "Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality" (1905). "Complete Psychological Works", vol. 7, pp. 125-244.
78 Rado, Sandor. "An Adaptational View of Sexual Behaviour," in "Psychosexual Development in Health and Disease". Hoch, P., and Zubin, J., eds. N.Y. Grune and Stratton, 1949, pp.159-189.
s. Charles W. Socarides, M.D., "Beyond Sexual Freedom" (New York Quadrangle, 1975). An overview of modern societal degeneration, including chapters on feminism, group-sex, communal living, pornography, homosexuality, and sex-mutilation surgery.
7 Hadley Arkes, "The Closet Straight," July 5, 1993. A response to gay editor of New Republic, Andrew Sullivan's "The Politics of Homosexuality," New Republic, May 10. More brilliant arguments.
6 Richard John Neuhaus, "Table for One," Dec 13, 1993. A review of homosexual Bruces Bawer's "A Place at the Table The Gay Individual in American Society." Contains many brilliant arguments.
54 J. Marmor, ed., "Homosexual Behaviour A Modern Reappraisal (New York Basic Books, 1980), cited in Brad Hayton, "The Homosexual Agenda Issues and Arguments" (Colorado Springs Focus on the Family, 1990), p.13.
3 Rich Lowry, "Roberta On a Rampage," May 2, 1994. An article on the antics of lesbian activist Roberta Achtenburg.
anti homo
Comments
Display the following 6 comments