SCIENCE SHOWS THAT HOMOSEXUALS ARE NOT BORN THAT WAY & A WAY OUT IF DESIRED

Sigh...The mainstream media is at it again in violation of journalistic integrety for the sake of political correctness and a pro-gay avocacy agenda in misquoting Dr. Simon Levay.

I read the so-called 'scientific articles pontificating that homosexuality is genetic that were e-mailed to me and found them lacking in true scientific objectivity.

In short, if one believes that homosexuality is genetic, I will sell that person the CN Tower (Toronto Ontario Canada).

The New World Order is promoting homosexuality as an embraced way of Life. The Bible speaks strongly against homosexuality and The New world order uses its public puppets to promote homosexuality anyway it can. Obama just passed don’t ask don’t tell and his next new world order agenda is to pass homosexual marriage. This will not happen easily as 79% of Americans are firmly against it. The other 21% are either homosexuals or related to homosexuals or bisexuals or pedophiles or atheists. Homosexuals will never quote scientific findings to make their argument. Actually there is no argument to justify being a homosexual. It is abnormal and satanic. And being a Homosexual is an abomination to GOD. 

1.) Dr. Dean Hamer who failed to find a “gay gene”:
Homosexuality is not purely genetic. Environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay. I don’t think that we will ever be able to predict who will be gay.”

2.) Dr. Dean Hamer was asked by Scientific American if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology. He replied: “Absolutely not. From twin studies we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors, not negate the psychosocial factors.”

(“New Evidence of a “Gay Gene,” by Anastasia Toufexis, Time, November 13, 1995, Vol. 146. Issue 20, p.95)

3.) British researchers generated comparable results in an identical-twin study. Their conclusion? The surprisingly low odds that both twins were homosexual The study by them: “confirmed that genetic factors are insufficient explanation for the development of sexual orientation.”

(King, M and McDonald, E. Homosexuals Who Are Twins: A Study of 46 Probands. British Journal of Psychiatry. 160: 407-409 (1992).

4a.)Homosexual researcher Simon Levay, who studied the hypothalamic differences between the brains of heterosexuals and homosexuals: “It didn’t show that gay men are born that way the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.”

4b.)Dr. Simon Levay: The most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role. Levay, Simon (1996). Queer Science, MIT Press.

5.) Dr. J. Satinover:

“Research studies on homosexuality by Dr’s Dean Hamer, Michael Bailey, Richard Dillard, Simon Levay. Laura Allen and Roger Gorski have failed to show proof of a gay gene. There is no scientific evidence that shows that homosexuality is genetic. The media has sensationalized and perpetuated the myth of a homosexual gene.”

Satinover, J. M.D. (1996) Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Grand Rapids. Baker Books

6.) Another of Dr. Jeffery Satinover’s conclusions in “The Gay Gene”:

“There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is genetic–and none of the research itself claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do when speaking in sound bites to the public.” (Jeffery Satinover, M.D. The Journal of Human Sexuality, 1996, p.8)

7.) The American Psychological Association:

“Many scientists share the view that sexual orientation is shaped for many people at an early age through complex interactions of biology, psychological and social factors.”

(The American Psychological Association’s pamphlet “Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality.”

8.) The American Psychiatric Association (2000):

“no replicated scientific studies showing any specific biological aetiology for homosexuality.”

9.) Sociologist Steven Goldberg:

“I know of no one in the field who argues that homosexuality can be explained without reference to environmental factors.” (Goldberg, Steven (1994) When Wish Replaces Thought: Why So Much of What You Believe is False. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.

10a.) Science, 1994:

“Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioural traits only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. “Unfortunately,” says Yale’s [Dr. Joel] Gelernter: “It’s hard to come up with many findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviours that have been replicated…all were announced with great fanfare, all were greeted naively in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.”

(Mann, C. “Genes and Behaviour.” Science 264: 1687 (1994), pp. 1686-1689.)

10b.) “The interactions of genes and environment are much more complex than the simple “violence genes” and “intelligence genes” touted in the popular press.”

Mann, C. op. cit. pp. 1686-1689

11.) Two genetics researchers, one at Harvard, commented in Technology Review, July 1993 p. 60 concerning twin studies. “While the authors interpreted their findings as evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality, we think that the data, in fact, provide strong evidence for the influence of the environment.” (Billings, P. and Beckwith, J. Technology Review, July 1993. p.60)

12.) P. Scott Richards:

“Some environmental and psychological factors that may play a causal role in the development of homosexuality include: (1) cross-gender effeminate behaviour in childhood. (2) gender-identity deficits (3) hostile, detached or absent fathers (which leads to “defensive detachment” from the father and other males) and (4) overly close, controlling or dominating mothers.

(P. Scott Richards, “The Treatment of Homosexuality: Some Historical, Contemporary and Personal Perspectives,” AMCAP Journal. Vol 19, No. 1, 1993, pg. 36)

13.) Lesbian biologist Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling of Brown University, responding to the “born that way” argument: “It provides a legal argument that is, at the moment actually having some sway in court. For me, it’s a very shaky place. Its bad science and bad politics. It seems to me that the way we consider homosexuality in our culture is an ethical and a moral one.”

14.) Camille Paglia, lesbian activist: “Homosexuality is ‘not normal’. On the contrary it is a challenge to the norm. Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single, relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction. No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous. Homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.”

Camille Paglia:” Is the gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not wish to be gay? Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are theoretically possible. However, habit is highly refractory, and once the sensory pathways have been blazed — a phenomenon obvious in the struggle with obesity, smoking, alcoholism or drug addiction…helping to learn how to function heterosexually, if they wish, is a perfectly worthy aim.”

Camille Paglia: ” We should be honest enough to consider whether homosexuality may not indeed be a pausing at the prepubescent stage where children anxiously band together bt gender…current gay cant insists that homosexuality is ‘not a choice’; that no one would choose to be gay in a homophobic society. But there is an element of choice in all behaviour, sexual or otherwise. It takes an effort to deal with the opposite sex; it is safer to deal with your own kind. The issue is one of challenge versus comfort.” Boys victimized by older men are far more likely to be homosexual as adults, and the cycle often repeats itself. More environmental factors.

15.) Noted child sex-abuse expert David Finkelhor found that “boys victimized by older men were over four times more likely to be currently engaged in homosexual activity than were non-victims. The finding applied to nearly half the boys who had such an experience. Further, the adolescents themselves often linked their homosexuality to their victimization experiences.”

(Bill Watkins & Aaron Bentovim, “The Sexual Cause of Male Adolescents: A Review of Current Research,” Journal of Child Psychiatry 33, (1992); in Byren Finkelman, Sexual Abuse (New York: Garland Publishing, 1995), p. 316

16.) The Archives of Sexual Behaviour: “One of the most salient findings of this study is that 46% of homosexual men and 22% of homosexual women reported having been molested by a person of the same gender.”

(Marie, E. Tomeo “Comparative Data of Childhood and Adolescent Molestation in Heterosexual and Homosexual Persons.” Archives of Sexual Behaviour 30 (2001): 539)

17.) A study of 279 homosexual and bisexual men with Aids and control patients reported:

“More than half of both case and control patients reported a sexual act with a male by age 16 years, approximately 20% by age 10 years.”

(Harry W. Haverkos, “The Initiation of Male Homosexual Behaviour,” The Journal of the American Medical Association 262 (July 28, 1989): 501)

18.) A study of 229 convicted child molesters found that: “86% of offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.”

(W.D. Erickson, Behavior Patterns of Child Molesters, Archives of Sexual Behavior 17 (1988): 83)

19.) A National Institute of Justice Report states that: “the odds that a childhood sexual abuse victim will be arrested as an adult for any sex crime is 4.7 times higher than for people…who experienced no victimization as children.”

(Cathy Spatz Widom, “Victims of Childhood Sexual Abuse – Later Criminal Consequences, Victims of Childhood Sexual Abuse Series: NIJ Research in Brief (March 1995): 6)

20.) A Child Abuse and Neglect study found that 59% of male child sex offenders had been victims of contact sexual abuse as a child.

(Michelle Elliott, “Child Sexual Abuse Prevention: What offenders Tell Us” Child Abuse and Neglect 19, (1995): 582)

---

            Sigh...The mainstream media isn't going to do articles on the testimony on two prominent ex-gays. For the homosexual community, if ethically desired; there is a way out of the gay scene as ascribed from these former lesbian and homosexual sincere individuals - as follows:

A Lesbian's Deliverance By Charlene Israel & Prominent U.S. Gay Activist Now Publicly Speaking Out Against Homosexuality: Michael Glatze

A Lesbian's Deliverance

By Charlene Israel

CBN News

June 23, 2007

CBNNews.com - After 29 years as a gay activist, former lesbian magazine publisher Charlene Cothran stunned the homosexual community when she announced she had become a Christian. She has renounced her homosexuality, and changed the format of her magazine (Left-hand click: http://www.venusmagazine.org/index.html) to spread the Gospel to the gay community.

As a gay rights activist, Cothran was never afraid to fight for what she believed in. For 30 years, she was as vocal and in your face as they come. She organized and marched with other lesbians in gay rights parades. And as editor-in-chief of Venus magazine, a national gay and lesbian publication, she wasn't about to change -- until something happened at a gay pride celebration that she never expected. "In 2003, I was in Chicago at a gay pride event, in the middle of this beautiful park," Cothran recalled. "I took a panoramic view, and as far as I could see there were men with men and women with women, all just partying and having a good time. But a shame fell on me, I felt so out of place. I knew something in my spirit spoke that, 'this is that road that leads to destruction, and you're on it.'"

It took several years to come to terms with this vision, and during that time Cothran continued to publish her gay and lesbian magazine. But she couldn't escape the message she'd heard that day in 2003. She said, "I kept myself busy with marches and activism and public appearances. But in the still of the night when everything is over, there was still that little voice, "You're not right with God."

Cothran says she longed for peace, but even in the midst of a long-term relationship, she felt intense loneliness. She'd grown up in a Christian home, and had come into the lesbian lifestyle at 19, after several bad relationships with boys. "I didn't want anything to do with men anymore," she said. "I was away at college and that was a whole new world, and in that world there were many, many women who were attracted to me, and, of course, I was attracted to them. And these women were nurturing, wanted to get to know me intellectually -- they were organizers whom I found a lot of comfort in. It felt good, it felt right."

But it didn't feel right anymore.

Then in June 2006, local Pastor Vanessia Livingston of Miracle Deliverance Church called Cothran, regarding an article in one her publications. She didn't know anything about Cothran's life and proceeded to talk to her about God. Livingston asked Cothran, "What are you going to do about your life?" Then she told her, "'You need to get your life together.' Cothran said, 'I'm in the life.' I said, 'Yes, I know, that's why I'm talking to you, but you don't have to stay in the life. You can be delivered today, right now, right where you are.'" They talked for awhile and Cothran remembers her words: "I can tell that you want to come back to God, but you feel unworthy, you feel that God can't use you because you've been marching and publishing and you've been such a proud lesbian all these years, but that's not true. He's waiting."

That day changed everything for Charlene Cothran, as she finally asked Jesus Christ to come into her heart and forgive her.

It was a personal transformation that she immediately wanted to share with her gay and lesbian followers. She wrote a front page article in her magazine called, "Redeemed! Ten Ways to Get Out of the Gay Life, if You Want Out." "When the Lord saved me, I knew everything would change," she said. "All of the ads, the editorials, the mission of the magazine had changed. We're going to be calling people out of homosexuality."

Most of the response from the gay and lesbian community has been fierce and negative. But she says she knows that many of them are just as conflicted as she was. Cothran said, "In order to fill up this empty space, they pretend to put on this wonderful face, 'how gay and happy I am,' when in fact -- there's a lot of loneliness in the gay community that's not talked about, and it's real." But there has been positive feedback as well. Cothran says she gets lots of e-mails from people who say they struggle with homosexuality and want out.

CBN News asked Cothran, "I know people probably ask you, do you still have feelings for women, and are you dating a man?"

Cothran replied, "I'm living a celibate life. I'm so focused on the spirit right now, that I have no urges for anyone -- man or woman."

With a new outlook about herself and life, Cothran is still on the frontlines of the gay rights battle, only now she sees it as a spiritual fight to lead others to the freedom she's found. "Our mission now," she said, "is to educate and to turn people away from the homosexual lifestyle simply by presenting the truth. We simply want people to question what they've learned through the pages of Venus magazine over the past 13 years."

Prior to Cothran's conversion, Venus circulated about 35,000 copies per issue which ran four times a year. But after the issue featuring her testimony, the gay political machine pressured advertisers to drop the magazine. And gay pride events and college campuses no longer subscribe. But in her own words, Cothran has no regrets about her change. She said, "There is a joy and a peace that you can't find in a club, I don't care how good the music is. You can't find it in the middle of a gay pride parade, I don't care if you have the biggest, prettiest float. I have a joy and a peace that I wouldn't trade for anything."

So when a gay thought, a call, or any opportunity to sin in your flesh or otherwise is 'presented' to you, say out loud:

"Satan, the Lord rebukes you! Take that thought back to HELL where it came from!  That is NOT my desire. That is YOUR presentation and I REJECT it!  Thank you Jesus for freeing me and giving me the power, through your Spirit, to walk in the Spirit and for teaching me how to use the weapon of the Word of God!"

This is spiritual warfare 101.  Every Christian must learn to use the Word as a weapon when we need.

Prominent U.S. Gay Activist Now Publicly Speaking Out Against Homosexuality

Encouraging others to leave way of life he says "is by its very nature pornographic"

By John Jalsevac

July 3, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Michael Glatze, once a rising star in the homosexual movement, having become the editor of the popular Young Gay America magazine in his early 20s, has since left the homosexual lifestyle and is now publicly speaking out against homosexuality, and encouraging other homosexuals to leave the way of life that he says "is by its very nature pornographic."

In a powerful testimonial printed yesterday on WorldNetDaily, Glatze  publicly reveals his conversion, and chronicles his tumultuous and unhappy journey through homosexuality, to where he is today, a recovered homosexual and a Christian, eager to lead others out of the lifestyle that claimed him for so many years.

"Homosexuality, delivered to young minds, is by its very nature pornographic. It destroys impressionable minds and confuses their developing sexuality; I did not realize this, however, until I was 30 years old," writes Glatze in the article on WorldNetDaily.

Glatze is the second prominent homosexual rights activist involved with a pro-homosexual magazine to have publicly left the lifestyle in the last year. Charlene Cothran, the founder and publisher of VENUS magazine, formerly a pro-homosexual publication, has since become a Christian, left the homosexual lifestyle, and has radically altered the nature of her magazine, changing it into a forum by which to "encourage, educate and assist those who desire to leave a life of homosexuality."

"Although I have lived as a lesbian for my entire adult life, it is without a doubt my soul's purpose to use my gifts to LOVINGLY share the truth about how we got here," Cothran wrote in the first issue of the magazine dedicated to its new purpose. "How we came to be gay or lesbian, how we came to enjoy our 'lifestyle' and how we came to believe that this was OK with God."

For his part Michael Glatze relates how, after years working at the very forefront of the pro-homosexual movement, he began to have increasing doubts about what he was doing with his life. This feeling heightened, he said, after reviewing his "performance" during  an appearance on the prestigious JFK JR. Forum at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government in 2005, in which he appeared as an "expert" on the pro-homosexual side.

"Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God." The young homosexual activist says that he had developed a relationship with God some time before, as a consequence of a painful illness that stemmed from the way he had been living.

"It became clear to me, as I really thought about it--and really prayed about it--that homosexuality prevents us from finding our true self within. We cannot see the truth when we're blinded by homosexuality."

"We believe, under that influence of homosexuality, that lust is not just acceptable, but a virtue."

From that point onward, says Glatze, he simply began to call his homosexual desires what they were--lust--and by focusing on his truest self he was able to begin the long process of healing. "Healing from the wounds caused by homosexuality is not easy," he says. "There's little obvious support. What support remains is shamed, ridiculed, silenced by rhetoric or made illegal by twisting of laws…Part of the homosexual agenda is getting people to stop considering that conversion is even a viable question to be asked, let alone whether or not it works."

Despite the immense difficulties of the transition, however, he says, "In my experience, 'coming out' from under the influence of the homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing thing I've ever experienced in my entire life." 

He concludes, "Healing from the sins of the world will not happen in an instant; but, it will happen--if we don't pridefully block it. God wins in the end, in case you didn't know."

Yours In All Our Politically Best Interests.

Mike Researcher

ARCHIVE: DYSFUNCTIONAL DISORDER IN CANADIAN POLITICS & POLITICAL INGRATITUDE

AN APPEAL TO ALL ETHICAL CANADIAN VOTERS,

SOME OF THE MAIN ATTRIBUTES OF A TRUE NATIONAL LEADER

            As aware by most Canadians, reported in the Canadian media, the Liberal Party faithful (the BORG) are yearning for an ‘exciting’ Liberal candidate to take them to the Parliamentary Promised Land. One of the major political names bandied around by the BORG was Justin Trudeau.

            Pasted is an insightful assessment of Justin Trudeau, as follows:

Justin's got his mom's brains, not his dad's

By PETER WORTHINGTON, Toronto Sun

Last Updated: March 17, 2011 3:43pm

Even if one tries, it’s pretty hard to see Justin Trudeau as anything but something of a jerk.

Yes, he’s an MP, but that’s no excuse.

And he’s his father’s son, but his dad did positive things as well as goofy things like going to China and praising the humanity of Chairman Mao.

Even when he was PM, Justin’s dad wasn’t immune to goofiness - like his adoration of Cuba’s Fidel Castro and his curious view that the KGB was similar to our RCMP - or vice-versa.

That was when he was in denial that the Soviet Union had subversive designs on Canada, contrary to evidence to the contrary.

But it’s doubtful if Justin’s dad would ever object to viewing so-called honour killings and female genital mutilation and spousal abuse and forced marriages as “barbaric”, as Justin did in his role as Liberal justice critic.

Justin said that instead of calling these practices “barbaric”, the government’s booklet Discover Canada (to help immigrants to adjust to our peculiar way of life) should have used the term “absolutely unacceptable”. Baloney...Why a euphemism to soften or justify disgusting and cruel practices masquerading as cultural traditions?

Justin has since back-watered - perhaps because a lot of Liberal MPs as well as Tory MPs found his indignation weird and misdirected.

In a radio interview Justin said he was “uncomfortable” with so-called honour killings being called “barbaric”.

Why “uncomfortable”? If not barbaric, what are they? Female mutilation, forced marriages and the rest of Sharia law are obscene by civilized standards, and to pretend otherwise is hypocritical and wrong.

Justin has now apologized. Post-media News reports he e-mailed them: “Perhaps I got tangled in semantic weeds in my comments, particularly in view of the Conservatives’ cynicism on these issues. I want to make it clear that I think the acts described are heinous, barbaric acts that are totally unacceptable in our society.”

Sorry, Justin, that’s not good enough. Maybe even “absolutely unacceptable”, to quote your initial view.

Just how are Conservatives “cynical” about honour killings and female genital mutilation? And what “semantic weeds” would these be? He now calls the practices “barbaric”, so why the complaint that the government pamphlet for immigrants uses the word?

“Cynicism” applies more to Justin’s reaction than to the Tories.

Surely, this is one issue on which most Canadians - especially elected ones - can agree. It’s pretty hard to see Justin’s dad objecting, but then his dad had done something with his life before entering politics and becoming PM to irrevocably change Canada.

And what does Justin mean when he opines that the publication in question “needs to be a little bit of an attempt at responsible neutrality.”

Oh? What sort of “neutrality”, one wonders, is there in opposing or condemning honour killings and such? “Neutrality” is the last thing needed in condemning such “barbarism.”

Anyway, Justin now regrets his impetuous outburst - but he’s still a jerk, and one who should give pause to those who fancy he’d be an ideal choice to someday lead the Liberal party.

Justin, it seems, has his mother’s brains, rather than his father’s .

---

DYSFUNCTIONAL DISORDER IN CANADIAN POLITICS 
            Sigh…At present, especially because of our turbulent economic times, potential nuclear fallout from the failed Japanese nuclear power reactors in the aftermath of a major earthquake, and the present mid-east instability; we need an unflappable captain of the head of the government helm, so ‘excitement’ and/or 'freaking out' - we do not need. The reality of a good leader of any nation entails 10% inspiration - 90% perspiration.

            Some of the major concerns that Opposition Liberal Leader: Michael Ignatieff is not suitable as the future Prime Minister of Canada, are as follows:

1. To reiterate, I was impressed with the putting aside of political partisanship insofar Prime Minister: Stephen Harper acknowledged NDP Leader: Jack Layton's input and advice about the manner of implementation and the logistical difficulties regarding Canada’s response to the January 2010 Haitian earthquake crisis. However, where were Michael Ignatieff's and BQ Leader: Gilles Duceppe's input during that crisis? Even when I brought this up to average non-political people, they noticed that there was nothing in the media regarding Michael Ignatieff responding to the Haitian earthquake disaster in consultations with our Prime Minister. If accessing a potential national leader, he/she putting aside political partisanship in an emergency for the good of all Canadians is a requirement.
2. In 2008, in the height of the economic downturn, Opposition Liberal Leader: Michael Ignatieff was known that he did not want to divulge his party’s financial agendas to our present Prime Minister because of fears that the Stephen Harper government would ‘steal them.’ To allay fears, the opposition leader’s plan or agenda could have been documented and photocopied to be used as political economic fodder against this present government in the next federal elections. So what? Even if Prime Minister: Stephen Harper and his ruling Conservative Party were that crass, a potential Prime Minister who truly cared for Canada would set aside political partisan for the sake of national economic interests.
3. While the falsification of documents (KIAROS) and questionable election financial procedures are not to be condoned, so what? This has never been done in the past by previous federal governments? Was there no none-partisan appreciation for International Aid Minister: Bev Oda for implementing 3 million dollars of international aid for African women and children? It would not be surprising or grasping that the world’s national leaders are down on their knees begging spiritual powers-to-be that these are the worst ‘corruptions’ that they ever had to deal with in their own nation. To clarify, I want my Member of Parliament (MP) asking questions and suggesting empirical credible alternate solutions about what the government is implementing for the economy particularly in the riding where I live - not on and on about the above-mentioned political soap opera that belongs in the National Enquirer. The attacks on Bev Oda border on sexism and possible racism. In short, there doesn't seem to be a feasible/empirical vision by Michael Ignatieff and the liberal Party of Canada.
4. Michael Ignatieff seems to be fanatically trying to set up the present government (coalition or not) rather than cooperating with the Stephen Harper government. The Liberal party doesn't seem capable of an implementing empirical vision and agenda to give Canadian voters a meaningful choice and/or a viable alternative. Perhaps, there is nothing consequential for the Federal Liberal Party to give without hard scrutiny.
5. Regarding implementing a coalition government because of a workable coalition government in the UK, sigh…I wish more Canadians who favour a federal coalition government would think. British Prime Minister: David Cameron formed a coalition with patriotic political parties such as the Liberal Democrats and on occasion, the Labour Party - not the (SNP) Scottish Nationalist Party.
6. It seems that the only high point of the Liberal Party of Canada was a few years previously in the Parliament House of Commons - Oral Questions pertaining to questions regarding the Afghanistan mission. Liberal MP: Bob Rae stuck a political nail into DP Leader: Jack Layton by challenging him on why he and the NDP do not support the present mission. This is contrary to the agenda of other national feminist organizations insofar are supportive of present UN involvement on the basis of empowerment of Afghani women and school girls. Left-hand click on http://www.feminist.com/activism/afghanalert1.html and http://feministmajority.org/media/pressAfghanWomen_032709.asp for further information
   

   
7. In Canada, there is a perception of a hypocritical trend among a considerable of Canadian feminists advocating pulling our troops out of Afghanistan insofar to the point of not showing solidarity with their 'sisters' in other parts of the world. Regarding the 3 million dollars set aside by the Stephen Harper government for African women and children and other tangible generous international aid development that were implemented; there is a hypocritical bias by the BORG insofar the previous federal Liberal government’s contributions to international aid development (albeit, sometimes inflammatory and controversial) was 'humanitarian', 'being globally sophisticated', 'having a positive world-view', 'visionary', and 'insightful'; whereas the present Stephen Harper government is insincerely maligned on the unethical basis: 'the contributions are needed in Canada - not in developing nations'. Disturbingly, Planned Parenthood - Canada tried to pressure the Federal Canadian government into blackmailing African countries by withholding financial aid if their anti-abortion laws are not dropped. Thankfully, the Canadian government did not cave in but offered unconditional financial aid. This is despicable to pressure any developing nation to accommodate their 'pro choice' agenda. Not only is this impugning the sovereignty of these African nations but is subliminal colonialism and racism. Even among a sizable minority of Canadians, there are ongoing disagreements with abortion-on-demand legislation. Since when is international aid to be withheld if we do not agree with their laws? Who really are the heathen?

THE MAINSTREAM CANADIAN ‘LEFT-WING’ MEDIA a.k.a. ‘THE HOOTERVILLE TIMES’
            Again...Sigh…Right now especially because of our turbulent economic times, potential nuclear fallout from the failed Japanese nuclear power reactors in the aftermath of a major earthquake, and the present mid-east instability, we need an unflappable captain of the head of the government helm, so ‘excitement’ and/or freaking out - we do not need. To  reiterate, the reality of a good leader of any nation entails 10% inspiration - 90% perspiration.

            One of my posts: THE TRUE SPIRIT OF THE ONTARIO 'PRESS COUNCIL' has already dealt with the anti-Harper bias and/or other past media bias.

            Composed, is more media bias; as follows:

1. No ethical reporter, especially from the Toronto Star and CBC, seem to have the intelligence and/or the ethics to ask Michael Ignatieff, “Mr. Ignatieff, in lieu that you very recently laid on us Canadians during the election; your new 5-point ‘Liberal Family Pack’ Plan - why wasn’t this platform and/or other earlier financial proposals previously discussed with the Prime Minister (Stephen Harper) especially during the 2008 World Economic Crisis”?
2. Alas, instead of the traditional journalistic ethical points as who, what, when, where, and why; with the exception of world consequential big-ticket news; it is perceived by a considerable number of media junkies that a majority of the mainstream media isn’t reporting unbiased facts but are into advocacy. Maybe this is why increasing number of people are trying to find alternative media viewpoints on Google, Facebook, Twitter, and/or other internet media outlets

   ---

   

POLITICAL INGRATITUDE OF UNETHICAL CANADIAN VOTERS 
            There was a subliminal microsecond flash media byte that suggested that the Stephen Harper Conservative government increased transfer payments to Ontario by approximately 30%. It seemed that if one twice blinked their eyes, one would miss it. From the time when Paul Martin was Prime Minister, the most conservative estimates (pun intended); I calculated 29% increase to Ontario and Quebec. This is based from 2003 to 2010.

            Sigh...It's a given that the so-called left-wing media is not going to give this the coverage as it did the Helena Guergis/Rahim Jaffer unintentional politically-comedic bogus 'scandal'. The media coverage of the 'scandal' was so protracted; even the average Canadian was weary.

            Regarding the significant federal cash transfer payment increases (third column from the left on fiscal reference tables) to Quebec and Ontario will absolutely blow one away?

            Although, finances and economics are boring, thus put on this post are the new 2010 Quebec and Ontario Governments Public Accounts for observation and calculation (left-hand click or if problematic: copy and paste: www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2010/frt-trf-1004-eng.asp on http://www.google.ca/ and one should get one Google hit: (Fiscal Reference Tables - Part 5 of 10 2010) as follows:

#NOTE: ALTHOUGH THE FEDERAL LIBERAL GOVERNMENT SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED FEDERAL CASH TRANSFERS TO QUEBEC BETWEEN 2004 & 2006, THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE ACRIMONY REGARDING QUEBEC PREMIER: JEAN CHAREST AND THE PAUL MARTIN GOVERNMENT IN NEGOTIATIONS IN OBTAINING THE MONEY. PREMIER CHAREST NOT ONLY REFUSED TO ENDORSE THE CANADIAN FEDERAL LIBERAL PARTY IN ELECTIONS CANADA 2006, HE RECOMMENDED QUEBECERS TO VOTE CONSERVATIVE. THIS SHOULD HAVE TOLD THE HARD-CORE QUEBEC FEDERAL LIBERAL BORG AND THE BQ NOGOODNIKS SOMETHING! FROM 1992 - 2010, THE FEDERAL CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT INCREASED FEDERAL CASH TRANSFERS TO QUEBEC BY 41%!

#NOTE: ALTHOUGH THE FEDERAL LIBERAL GOVERNMENT SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED FEDERAL CASH TRANSFERS TO ONTARIO BETWEEN 2004 & 2006, THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE RANCOUR REGARDING ONTARIO PREMIER: DALTON McGUINTY AND THE PAUL MARTIN GOVERNMENT IN NEGOTIATIONS IN OBTAINING THE MONEY. ALTHOUGH A CLASSIC LIBERAL, PREMIER McGUINTY REFUSED TO ENDORSE THE CANADIAN FEDERAL LIBERAL PARTY IN ELECTIONS CANADA 2006 AND SUBSEQUENT FEDERAL ELECTIONS. THIS SHOULD HAVE TOLD THE HARD-CORE FEDERAL ONTARIO LIBERAL BORG SOMETHING! FROM 1992 - 2010, THE FEDERAL CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT INCREASED FEDERAL CASH TRANSFERS TO ONTARIO BY 53%!

            What is worrisome are the ONTARIO FEDERAL LIBERAL BORG COLLECTIVE and the ethically-challenged hard-core Bloc Quebecois voters who had knowledge of these tables and refused to offer tangible appreciation to the present Conservative Canadian government - are despicably dysfunctional to the point of treason. In so being, how would any of these politically-challenged people offer any ethical values to their partner, children, and/or grandchildren? 

---

CONCLUDING POLITICAL POSTSCRIPTS

            I (Mike Researcher) need to clarify some misconceptions. 

            I am not affiliated and/or defined by the Conservative party of Canada and/or any other Canadian federal political parties. 

            During the Brian Mulroney years, if former federal NDP leader: Ed Broadbent had run another term; I was going to vote for him. 

            In the mid 90’s, if former Constitutional Law expert, Federal Liberal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, and Newfoundland Premier: Brian Tobin had run and won the federal Liberal leadership convention - I would have voted for him and his government. 

            At present, the federal Liberal Party of Canada is beginning to be perceived by increasingly more Canadians as historically and politically redundant. Decades previously, eligible voters in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand voted either Conservative or Labour. Between 1916 and 1922, David Lloyd George was the last Liberal UK Prime Minister.  

            As of now, we are at a social/economic/political crossroads in Canadian history. 

            Alas, the sad pragmatic reality; because of globalization - big corporations have the flexibility to move their operations to China, India, Mexico etc.
            Sadly, this is the bottom line of any government (albeit well meaning) in desperately trying to 'attract investments'. 
            In so being, if one does not take unnecessary risks in business and personal finances in the real world, why for goodness sakes; take political risks? 
            I am going to take a chance? Yee Haw?
            I appeal to all eligible Canadian voters especially those that have a spouse and children - do not become 'economic road warriors' in voting for one of the opposition leaders or political parties and do vote for Stephen Harper out of one's own financial well being.            
            I implore that all of eligible Canadian voters ethically and privately think before they vote in 2011 Elections Canada.
            If in 4 years, a Stephen Harper majority government with an empirically stable economy is able to generate a surplus but is unsuitable and/or unwilling in directing Canadian taxpayers' money to relevant social programs - then Canadian voters have an option and/or luxury of voting for one of the opposition parties as a credible alternative.
            But for now, there is too much at stake for Canada.

Yours In All Our Politically Best Interests.

Mike Researcher

Mike Researcher

CHRISTOPHOBIA - PERSECUTION UNDER THE HYPOCRISY OF ‘INTOLERANCE’



 

A secular friend (a person of colour/African Canadian) was angered and grieved with the seeming non-responses of high-profile African-Canadian (in his own words) 'Uncle Toms' and 'Aunt Jemimas' regarding the brazenness of the homosexual/lesbian community daring to identify with persons of colour and other visible minorities.

To All Ethical People of All Sexuality,

            To clarify to the reader, I believe in live and let live. I am against wanton discrimination against anyone (whether homosexual or heterosexual).

            I am in philosophical solidarity with all ethical and just people against the persecution of homosexuals in concentration camps during the Nazi reign of terror in Europe during WW2. Homosexuals were forced to wear the pink triangle to distinguish themselves from other perceived Nazi named inferior sub-humans.             

            I believe it is none of anyone's business who one is. However, I believe that it is none of one's business telling/broadcasting who they are - let alone having a week (Gay Pride Week Toronto) and/or a day (Gay Pride Day Parade Toronto) about one's personal sexuality.              

            That being stated, it is dangerous with far-reaching sociological negative aftermaths that the Canadian Homosexual/Lesbian Community have gone too far in crossing the line in being able to be allowed same-sex marriage (the word: marriage has religious connotations) with full 'spousal' rights and to adopt children but it is more ominous that the persecuted have become the persecutors through the militant gay agenda, as follows on this web site: www.frontline.org.za/articles/Christophobia.htm and other venues

            To reiterate, Geoffrey, a student at UCLA and regular Rod 2.0 reader, joined the massive protest outside the Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood. Geoffrey was called the n-word at least twice.

            It was like being at a Klan rally except the Klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU N*GG*R, one man shouted at me. If your people want to call me a F*GG*T, I will call you a n*gg*r. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple...me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the n*gg*rs better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.

JUDICIAL PERSECUTION            

            In April 1996, Scott Brockie and his family's Toronto Ontario (Canada) printing business, Imaging Excellence, were approached with an order for letterhead, envelopes and business cards for the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives. Mr. Brockie, who is a Christian, refused to accept the order as it contravened his religious conscience to assist an organization's activities that directly promoted homosexuality, which he believed to be a sin. Two months later, a representative from the Archives filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission, asserting that Mr. Brockie had denied the individual commercial services based on the man's sexual orientation. In September 1999, Mr. Brockie and Imaging Excellence were found guilty of what was called discriminatory conduct. He was forced to pay a penalty to the Archives of $5,000 and to provide the printing services he had originally refused; in other words, to perform an act that he regarded as being unethical or immoral. In addition, left-hand click on: www.theinterim.com/2002/july/02brockie (different condensed article but same theme). Interesting and disturbing, a Muslim lawyer was approached by EGALE (Equality For Gays and Lesbians Everywhere), the prominent gay rights advocacy group, and was asked to act for them in bringing a constitutional challenge to some legislation which denies a benefit to same-sex couples. The lawyer refuses, citing his religious belief that the Koran states that same-sex relationships are contrary to the law of Allah. EGALE never brought this Muslim lawyer to trial for his ‘human rights’ violation. Scott Brockie challenged the ruling to the Ontario Court of Appeals and was successful but EGALE took this to the Ontario Supreme Court which overturned the Ontario Court of Appeals ruling. Alas Scott Brockie is forced to take this the Canadian Supreme Court even though he has a business to run.           

            In Sweden, Pastor Ake Green was sentenced to a month in prison for having offended homosexuals in a sermon. Pastor Green is in his 70’s. When a reporter asked, “What about the Pastor’s rights”? The prosecutor replied, “When he started reading Bible verses about homosexuality, he crossed the line”.              

            Slovakia issued a protest against this heavy handed prison sentence for the pastor in Sweden, saying that this was an example of how “left-wing liberal ideology was trying to introduce tyranny and misuse the (European Union)” to silence freedom of expression. “In Europe, people are starting to be jailed for saying what they think."

            Hugh Owens, in Canada, was prosecuted for placing a small ad in his local newspaper in response to all, that he had been forced to observe during Homosexual Pride Week. His advert listed four Scripture references (Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10) next to an equal sign and a drawing depicting two men holding hands, superimposed over the line drawing with the universal red circle with a line through it, effectively summarizing the Scriptures listed. For that “crime,” Owen was fined $4,500. The newspaper was also fined. So, in Canada, even listing Bible verses can be construed as a “hate crime!”            

            Dr. James Dobson’s “Focus on the Family” must now edit their Canadian radio programs to remove anything that might be deemed critical of homosexuality, including Bible verses on the subject, and information like the fact that, according to the Centre for Disease Control, the majority of the cases of AIDS in the US are men who engage in homosexual sex.

            In New Zealand, two Christian videos that questioned safe sex slogans and exposed the link between AIDS and homosexual behaviour were outlawed by the New Zealand parliament.

            When retired air force officer, Enoch Lawrence, in response to a homosexual poster the company had placed near his cubicle, placed a Bible verse, and a bumper sticker that read: “Marriage: One Man One Woman” in his own work cubicle, he was fired by Hewlett-Packard. While a “Pagan Pride Festival” flyer was posted in the break room of Hewlett-Packard, Lawrence’s Pro-Marriage bumper sticker was forbidden.             

            The head of the Central British Columbia Public Health Board, Chris Kempling, with a PHD in psychology, was suspended from his teaching job at the local high school for writing a letter to the editor of his local newspaper. He stated that homosexuality was not a genetic orientation, that homosexual sex was often unhealthy and promiscuous and that homosexuals could become straight. The judge pronounced Kempling a “bigot.” Although Kempling was never accused of any discriminatory act, he was condemned for having wrong thoughts. 

            Dianne Haskett, the Mayor of London, Ontario, Canada, was fined $10,000 for refusing to proclaim a “Gay Pride Weekend.” After she lost her case in Canada’s courts, she resigned as mayor rather than to be forced to proclaim the event - just 3 weeks before Election Day. (However, the voters re-elected her with an overwhelming 64% of the vote).  

            An elderly Englishman, Harry Hammond, was heckled, ridiculed and attacked on the street for holding a sign that read: “Stop immorality. Stop homosexuality. Stop lesbianism.” He was assaulted and knocked to the ground, but when the police showed up they arrested the victim of the assault! He was prosecuted for the opinion he expressed.             

            When a local school in Canada started handing out copies of the Koran and announced the policy of setting aside a room for Muslim students to pray during school hours, Pastor Mark Harding objected. Pointing out that Christian, Jewish and Buddhist children were not afforded similar opportunities, Harding was prosecuted. Despite Pastor Harding’s publicly stating his love for Muslims and commitment to evangelising his Muslim neighbours, he received more than 3,000 hate filled calls, many of them death threats. ‘Some people in the courtroom motioned by running their finger across their neck from ear to ear. Entering the court, Harding had to pass through crowds of Muslims chanting: “Infidel you will burn in Hell!” However, as they were not prosecuted, these death threats were apparently not considered “hate speech.”

            Harding reported receiving a call from someone, identifying himself as from Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam group, who told him that: “They were going to break my legs.” Other calls threatened various amputations and mutilations. Yet, it was Pastor Harding who was convicted of having “willfully promoted hatred” and required to undergo 2 years probation and 340 hours of “community service” at the Islamic Society of North America, where he was forced to go through Islamic “re-education.”

FREEDOM IS AT RISK             

            Janet Folger, in The Criminalization of Christianity states: “Christians are singled out, labelled, fined, interrogated, humiliated, indoctrinated, fired, ordered to attend re-education programmes and sent to jail for expressing Biblical views…this battle is for truth and freedom. And we are losing by default… If we stay silent on controversial issues, like the slaughter of more than 45 million American children…no one will be offended… We work very hard to present a sensitive, positive Christianity to seekers who don’t like hearing about stuff like obedience and a place called Hell. ‘All we need is love’ has replaced ‘Onward Christian Soldiers’ as our anthem. Love is critical, of course, but so is Truth. The Bible says that God is love, but also that He is Holy… Unless we embrace Him as Lord, we will face Him as Judge. Keep in mind that Jesus talked more about Hell than He did about Heaven… and if we make Him Lord, we have to actually do what He says…He commanded us: “Rescue those who are unjustly sentenced to death; don’t stand back and let them die” Proverbs 24:11… “Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die” Proverbs 31:8… “Thou shalt not kill”…Exodus 20:17 “If you love Me you will keep My commandments” John 14:15… “Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action is dead.” James 2:17 “Your actions are what you believe. Everything else is just religious talk… if you want to be free to speak what you believe in your church, in your work place, in your community, you are going to have to get off the side lines and into the game…but this is more than just a game. It’s a battle for our freedom. Yes, we have the right to remain silent, but if we use it much longer, we may hear those words being read to us just before we see the inside of a prison cell.”

RIDICULE AND NAME CALLING             

            One tactic often used to silence Christians is ridicule. This encompasses everything from insults and name calling to character assassination.              

            Given the prevailing dogma of “tolerance” it is extraordinary to note the abusive terminology published against Christians.             

            One article in the Washington Post described Christians as “largely poor, uneducated and easy to lead.” Imagine describing any other group of people in that way in the press!            

            Ted Turner, the former owner of CNN, described Christians as “bozos” and Christianity as “a religion for losers.” Again, imagine any prominent figure describing the adherents of any other religion in such words.             

            Mel Gibson was one of Hollywood’s greatest stars, popular and respected - until he wanted to make a movie about the sufferings of Christ. No one in Hollywood was willing to finance or distribute it. Mel Gibson began being described as “a wacko”,”crazy”, “a real nut case”, and worse. Interestingly enough, The Passion of the Christ, in terms of box-office sales, became one of the top ten most successful films of all time - despite the extraordinary Hollywood and news media campaign against it. Despite Christianity being based on the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ to love one another, love our neighbours, love our enemies, return good for evil, to forgive and be merciful, Christians are frequently referred to in the most negative terms: “The forces of genuine evil, evil, genuine evil;”“Their religion is so narrow, and it is so mean, and it’s so ugly…”            

            Roseanne Barr publicly exclaimed: “You know what else I can’t stand, is them people that are anti-abortion. F – Them; I hate them. They’re horrible; they’re hideous people. They’re ugly, old, geeky, hideous men… they just don’t want nobody to have an abortion…”            

            Syndicated radio host, Howard Stern, after vehemently arguing for abortion, responded to a pro-life caller in these words: “You’re an idiot. I can’t stand dumb people. If I were president, I would have you gassed. I would march you into the ovens!” Can one imagine any radio host being able to refer to Muslims, Jews or any other group with such words!            

            At a Grateful Dead concert, musician Bob Weir announced to a crowd of 30,000: “Can I hear everyone say, ‘F-the Christian Right?”

ANTI-CHRISTIAN PREJUDICE             

            “If they are Christians, you can hate them. You can ridicule them, and before you silence them make sure you blame them for everything you don’t like. Pick a Christian, any Christian. And, hey, why not start at the top? There are now more than 50 books bashing (President) Bush”

            Hypocritically, the California National Organisation of Women (www.canow.org) and NOW - National Organization of Women (www.now.org) did not show any solidarity with Miss California, Carrie Prejean being insulted by Perez Hilton with anti-women sexist 'b' words and 'c' words on Facebook. Are we to believe that so-called women rights advocates are ethical and have integrity insofar in excluding evangelical Christian women when their rights are trampled by the other sex -whether straight or gay in any situation?

HOMOSEXUAL BIAS

            Former Clinton White House Spokesman, Mike McCurry, declared that anyone who believed what the Bible had to say about homosexuality was “backward thinking.” Can you imagine him saying that about people who believed the Koran?             

            The Criminalisation of Christianity observes that while there were 13,500 stories on the murder of Matthew Shepard, who was a homosexual, there were only 632 stories on the brutal murder of 13 year old Jesse Dirkhising by homosexual assailants. The people who killed Matthew Shepard later confirmed that they didn’t do it out of any animosity for his sexual behaviour – they killed him for money for drugs. Both killers attacked Shepard for robbery, it had nothing to do with his homosexuality. Yet there was massive newspaper and TV coverage of the Shepard case, two major Hollywood specials, three TV movies and a play, all depicting Shepard as a victim of an anti-homosexual hate crime. However, people like Jesse Dirkhising, who was bound, gagged and brutally sodomised, then smothered to death, by homosexual assailants failed to receive any such media coverage. Similarly, the murder of Mary Stachowicz, a 51 year old wife, and mother of 4, who was murdered by a 19 year old homosexual, Nicholas Gutierrez, for witnessing to him and suggesting that he could change his lifestyle, was ignored by most newspapers. This mother - who was described as a deeply compassionate church member and soft-spoken - was “punched, kicked, stabbed and strangled to death.” But that wasn’t considered a hate crime.

HATRED AND BLASPHEMY             

            Folger points out that while pro-family leaders repeatedly condemned the murder of Shepard, the homosexual community never condemned this horrific murder. Posted on the ACLU On Line Forum, were these comments: “I really don’t feel sorry for her. She paid a very steep price for being an arrogant religious fascist.” And “quite frankly, if anyone in this case was being persecuted it was Mr. Gutierrez.” Posted on YAHOO were these comments: “Maybe (Stachowicz’s murder) will strike fear in the hearts of a few fundamentalists…Where do I send a cheque for (Gutierrez’s) defense fund!”; “the B- had it coming to her. I’m glad he killed her…the B- deserved to die!” So tolerance does not seem to apply toward Pro-Life, Pro-Family Christians. Nor does any amount of venom poured out against Christians seem to be worthy of the designation “hate speech.” American Christians have endured all kinds of harassment and threats from militant homosexuals. ACT UP (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power) founder, Eric Pollard, threatened Pro-Family leaders: “I shall torture you during the day time, and will keep you from a peaceful sleep at night.” In Madison, Wisconsin, 400 homosexual activists stormed Trinity Evangelical Fellowship Church shouting obscenities inside the church for nearly an hour, while some of the protesters urinated and defecated on the church floor. Hundreds of others banged on the walls and windows with rocks and trash can lids, shouting: “Crush the Christians!” and “Bring back the lions!” ACT UP member, Michael Petrelis, publicly stated: “We should have shut down the subway and burned down City Hall. I think rioting is a valid tactic and should be tried…if some one took out (former Congressman) Jesse Helms or William Dannemeyer…I will be the first to stand up and applaud.” At St. Patrick’s Cathedral, ACT UP homosexual activists stormed the church, screamed obscenities and stomped on communion bread, urinating in the church. Posters with vile curses against the Pro-Life pastor and the church predominated. ACT UP protesters simulated various perversions on the altar, and swarmed around congregants pelting them with condoms and shouting and threatening them.

ATTACKING THE CHURCH             

            In their book When the Wicked Seize a City, Chuck and Donna McIlhenny, described what happened after the San Francisco Presbyterian Church fired a homosexual organist. “Rocks, beer bottles, beer cans were thrown through the church windows on many occasions. Swastikas were carved in the church doors and drawn on our house. A window in our car was smashed out. Graffiti was spray painted all over the church, house and sidewalk. Anti-Christian, Pro-homosexual leaflets were scattered around the neighbourhood, calling us Nazis, bigots, anti-gay, etc. Demonstrators would come to our Sunday services and disrupt the worship…one man came pounding and spitting on our front door in the middle of the night, screaming: ‘We’re going to get you McIlhenny – we’re going to kill you politically!’ We were verbally threatened outside the house on the way to the car. There were daily – 24 hours per day – telephone calls. It began with screaming and obscenities. They graduated in the phone calls to describing our children…and what sexually deviant behaviour was to be practiced on the children before killing them…Then…someone actually attempted to follow through with their threats to kill us by fire bombing the house while the children were asleep inside.”

BLOOD TERRORISM             

            One radical gay activist, Robert Schwab, suggested: “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.” Doug Herman of Pure Revolution lost his wife and baby to “blood terrorism.” Now he travels America speaking about Purity. Folger writes: “And let me assure you, homosexual activists attack him. You would think that killing his wife and daughter would have been enough.”

DIAGNOSIS BY INTIMIDATION             

            The New York Academy of Medicine issued a Report on Homosexuality in 1963, which stated: “Homosexuality is indeed an illness. The homosexual is an emotionally disturbed individual who has not acquired the normal capacity to develop satisfying heterosexual relations.” However, in 1973, the American Psychiatric Association voted to strike homosexuality from the official list of Psychiatric Illnesses. Not because of any new scientific revelations, nor even from any consensus within the scientific community, but because of threats and intimidation. Dr. Jeffery Satimoveo, in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, wrote: “Homosexual activists planned a systematic effort to disrupt the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.” Protesters broke into the meeting of APA members and grabbed the microphone and proclaimed: “Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you…we are rejecting you all…” The committee later voted that maybe homosexual behaviour was not a sign of psychiatric disorder after all. At the 1973 APA Convention, dissenters were allowed only 15 minutes to discuss 70 years of psychiatric research that contradicted it, before the hijacked vote was formally applied to the full membership. Although 69% of psychiatrists disagreed with the vote and still considered homosexuality a disorder, intimidation tactics had succeeded in forcing the APA to reverse their official position. In 1994, activists tried to make it illegal for practitioners to give therapy aimed at helping homosexuals change. Although this attempt failed to secure a majority vote, a few years ago, the APA published a study favourable to Pedophilia.

PERSECUTED FOR PROTECTING

            In recent years, the Boy Scouts of America have come under relentless attack for not allowing self-described homosexual activists to become Scout leaders. As a result of attempting to protect the children who had been entrusted to them, the Boy Scouts have been kicked out of parks, schools and public forums, denied funding by cities and counties. So far, despite being underfunded, ostracized, thrown out and left out, they have stood up against the ridicule, the assaults, the censorship and the law suits. And all that because they want to teach young boys honesty, courage, hard work, respect, patriotism and positive values.

CENSORSHIP IN THE CLASSROOM             

            When 5 year old Antonio Peck was told to make a poster on How to Save the World, he drew a picture of Jesus and wrote: “The only way to save our world.” His teacher told him that this was: “Unacceptable!” When Craig Cunningham of the Genocide Awareness Project set up a display at the University of Miami depicting various forms of Genocide throughout history, some students tried to cut, mangle and destroy them. Reason? He had included pictures of the Abortion Holocaust. A quote from the University paper concerning his Genocide Awareness Project: “Whoever these people are, they should be shot.” So whatever happened to freedom of speech on campus? Imagine some Christian writing something like that about, for example, a homosexual group? Why, that would be a hate crime!

PREFERRING PAGANISM             

            The Mayor of San Jose justified spending $500,000 of public money to construct a statue of the Aztec god, Quetzalcoatl, because the Aztec religion contained: “those elements that seek to elevate the human consciousness to a higher plane.” The fact that this very same Aztec religion marched hundreds of thousands of slaves to the top of their pyramid like temples, to have their still-beating hearts ripped out of their chests with flint knives, hardly seems to justify such praise. Yet at the same time as this tax funded Aztec idol was being erected, the San Jose Parks Board decided to remove a Nativity scene from the same park. (A flood of protests to the City Hall managed to reverse this incredible decision.) While GOOGLE takes ads for all kinds of XXX pornographic films and sites, GOOGLE recently banned an advertisement from a Christian Organisation, Stand To Reason, because the group’s website contained articles saying what the Bible says about homosexuality! Various judges nominated in the USA, have been opposed by liberals because: “His children are home-schooled”; “They are leaders in the Boy Scouts” and “They teach Sunday school”!

AN APPEAL TO THE NON-POLITICIZED ETHICALLY-MINDED MEMBERS OF GAY COMMUNITIES             

            Perhaps, the True Church should at least apologize to the gay community for miscommunication rather than its stance regarding homosexuality.              

            To open dialogue with the Gay Community - rather than using non-diplomatic and/or inflammatory tags such as ‘choice’, ‘lifestyle’, 'biological', and/or ‘who one is’ - a neutral term as sexual orientation would be conciliatory for positive communication in bridging gaps.

            The non-politicized ethically-minded gay community need to be open that bigotry and hatred is not only exclusive among the heterosexual community but also among the homosexual community.

            For the homosexual/heterosexual communities, is there no discernment among any of you that there are negative, unnatural, and evil nuances that permeate homosexual orientation through various Gay Pride parades? For example, because the feminist lesbian community did not tolerate sexual exploitation in the porn industry, how can sexual exploitation are tolerated through various Gay Pride parades and hypocritically from sexually exploitative magazines such as On Our Backs? In addition, it is hypocritical to protest against Hooters operating in local neighbourhoods and then, tolerate women exposing their breasts during Dyke March.

            For the Gay Community, tolerance should be extended for former homosexuals and lesbians in your community for whatever reasons, desire and/or became heterosexual.              

            In conclusion, may this small olive branch composition in this post extend to some peace and reconciliation?

You’re in all our mutually best interests,

Mike Researcher       

Mike Researcher