How to defeat the gay and lesbian movement in one generation

The gay and lesbian movement has been slowly gathering steam every since the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s. As such, many have been tempted to look at this movement as a culprit to the breakdown of the institution of marriage.

The gay and lesbian movement, however, is more like a vulture than it is like a hawk.

Where hawks actively seek out prey they can swoop in and kill. Vultures are content to feed off of the dead flesh of animals that have already died, either at the hands/claws of others, from disease, or simply from old age.

The sexual revolution, with it’s emphasis on sexual hedonism, is more like the hawk of marriage. It swooped in and fed on men from families by wounding them with the lie that they were aggressors and no longer needed.

It separated mothers from children by feeding them the feminist line that they were not “real women” unless they sought to become just like the men they were taught to despise.

And it picked off the children by condemning them to broken homes and permissive parenting. This had the unfortunate effect of producing weaker future parents and only perpetuated the downward spiral.

So how can we defeat the gay and lesbian movement in one generation?

Simple. We just refuse to provide any more dead flesh for them to feed on.

The simple truth is that the gay and lesbian movement cannot grow by producing their own offspring. Their plan of growth is limited exclusively to recruiting the products of heterosexual unions.

Share/Bookmark

31 responses to “How to defeat the gay and lesbian movement in one generation

  1. Excellent post Wes. It does make sense, since the movement can be likened to a vulture, to just not give the movement dead flesh to feed on. I also like how you mentioned how powerful sexual sin can be and that it does break homes/families; it's definitely been the easiest sin to fall in since the ancient world.

  2. I don't claim a default position. All truth claims must be supported by satisfactory evidence before they can be believed. If not, they can be left as indeterminate or shown false by contradicting evidence.

    As to the assertion that people are not borne gay. Well, I would cite biological design and it's apparent purpose and then say that I haven't found any reason to reject that design

    Millions of people are born every day with birth defects, missing limbs, diabetes, and other maladies that run counter to your purported biological design. Either your cosmic manufacturer is very poor at his craft or the state of humans at birth can vary wildly along every dimension. You haven't provided any evidence that sexual preference is any different.

  3. Homosexuality is reliant on the continuation of the hetrosexual species. Without hetrosexuals on the planet, homesexuals would eventually cease to exist. So which of these species adheres to the natural order of the planet?

  4. I would like to add here that if you take the sperm of a homosexual male and impregnate a lesbian woman according to the homosexual agenda we would produce a genetic gay baby. This is highly unlikely as to produce a baby we must revert to what is a natural hetrosexual behavior.

    To add to Mr L Dance's comments that we are homophobic, is nothing more than an agenda to say we discriminate. The true meaning of the homophobic is ones fear of deviant sexual tendencies in oneself. It is not the fear and hatred of people who choose their sexual preference. Can Mr L Dance define between a homophobe and a hetrosexual who says that sodomy is wrong?

  5. I never once used the word homophobic or fear. Project much?

  6. In 1973, the weight of so called "empirical data", and pressure from from the homosexual agenda changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). This apex of hedonism and extreme narcissm has led to a profession of the gay agenda. To justify and rationalize abnormal behavior and hide behind false lies similar to living on the holodeck of the enterprise.

  7. Some psychiatrists fiercely opposed this action and circulated a petition calling for a vote on the issue by the Association's membership. That vote was held in 1974, and the Board's decision was ratified because the APA had and continues to be, off the mark and ascribed to moral relativism.

    The new diagnosis"ego-dystonic homosexuality" was created for the DSM's third edition in 1980. This is the first attempt of the REDEFINITION strategy.

    This new diagnostic category was criticized by mental health professionals on numerous grounds. It was viewed by many as a political compromise to appease those psychiatrists – mainly psychoanalysts – who still considered homosexuality the pathology which it is.

  8. Others questioned the appropriateness of having a separate diagnosis that described the content of an individual's dysphoria. This is more evidence of the extremem measure of redefinition and betrays the agenda to a scrutinizing eye. Homosexual activists deny that the psychological problems related to ego-dystonic homosexuality are to be treated as other general diagnostic categories, and that the existence of the diagnosis perpetuated antigay stigma. More denial of the simple facts, thus an effort to redefine.

    According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Fears and misunderstandings about homosexuality are widespread…. [and] present daunting challenges to the development and maintenance of a positive self-image in gay, lesbian and bisexual persons and often to their families as well. All members of any family are affected by a gay person coming out for many reasons that go beyond fear and missunderstandings. Very simply, thesae are issues of the heart.

  9. To move again the agenda they chose to redefine homosexual disorder by ignoring it, defacto -endorsement of there being no psycho social ramifications to homosexuality. The boundary was subsequently pushed again by the influence of the gay agenda.

    In 1986, the diagnosis was removed entirely from the DSM. The only vestige of ego dystonic homosexuality in the revised DSM-III occurred under Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified, which included persistent and marked distress about one's sexual orientation (American Psychiatric Association, 1987; see Bayer, 1987, for an account of the events leading up to the 1973 and 1986 decisions). this seems to address only the torment of making the choice between hetro and homosexual behavior and that once the choice is made then its not a problem.

    It is amazing how twisted this story has become, because of the weakness of the APA.

Leave a Reply