The New School: Homosexual Propaganda and Your Kids

shutterstock_141409255-2The logic works like this: If homosexual acts are moral, as so many now insist, then they should be normative. If they are normative, they should be taught in our schools as a standard. If they are a standard, they should be enforced. And so it has come, and is coming, to be. Education is an essential part of the drive to universalize the rationalization for homosexual behavior; so it must become a mandatory part of the curriculum. What began as a plea for diversity ends with a demand for conformity.

The infiltration of higher education by LGBT studies is well known. However, less attention seems to have been paid to the effort to spread LGBT propaganda in elementary schools and high schools. Because of the young ages of students K through 12, the introduction of pro-homosexual materials has required a special sensitivity from those who are trying to get away with it. They must avoid the explicit nature of the LGBT courses offered at the college level and disguise the effort in terms of something other than what it really is. Therefore, they use a stealth approach under the cover of issues such as school safety, diversity, and bullying.

One of the primary organizations involved in spreading the rationalization for homosexual behavior in elementary and high schools is the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), begun in 1990 in Massachusetts. According to its mission statement, GLSEN “strives to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. We believe that such an atmosphere engenders a positive sense of self, which is the basis of educational achievement and personal growth. Since homophobia and heterosexism undermine a healthy school climate, we work to educate teachers, students and the public at large about the damaging effects these forces have on youth and adults alike”.

The statement sounds fairly anodyne, though its clear purpose is to make homosexuality acceptable, and for good reason. GLSEN’s founder, homosexual activist Kevin Jennings, spoke at a homosexual conference on March 5, 1995, titled “Winning the Culture War”, in which he laid out the rhetorical strategy for success. It is worth quoting at length for what it reveals about the agenda. Jennings said:

“If the Radical Right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language – ‘promoting homosexuality’ is one example – is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are ‘after their kids.’ We must learn from the abortion struggle, where the clever claiming of the term ‘pro-life’ allowed those who opposed abortion on demand to frame the issue to their advantage, to make sure that we do not allow ourselves to be painted into a corner before the debate even begins. In Massachusetts the effective reframing of this issue was the key to the success of the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth.

“We immediately seized upon the opponent’s calling card – safety – and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students’ safety by creating a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems, and suicide are common. Titling our report ‘Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth,’ we automatically threw our opponents onto the defensive and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling from day one.”

So successful was Mr Jennings in his framing operation that he was appointed in the first Obama administration to the position of Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, in the Department of Education. The irony was not lost on 52 members of Congress, who wrote to President Obama requesting that he rescind the appointment because Mr. Jennings had, as the letter stated, “for more than 20 years, almost exclusively focused on promoting the homosexual agenda”. Mr. Obama did not do so, and Mr. Jennings served in the position for two years.

GLSEN’s mission of promoting a safe and supportive environment for students of all sexual orientations means providing the approval of those orientations. In the Safe Space Kit: Guide to Being an Ally to LGBT Students, GSLEN provides an examination of conscience for those wanting to be allies to LGBT students. Here are some of the searching questions: “If someone were to come out to you as LGBT, what would your first thought be? Have you ever been to in LGBT social event, march or worship service? Why or why not? Have you ever laughed at or made a joke at the expense of LGBT people?”

With an Orwellian touch, the Safe Space Kit advises that, during casual conversations and classroom time, one should “make sure the language you are using is inclusive of all people. When referring to people in general, try using words like ‘partner’ instead of ‘boyfriend/girlfriend’ or ‘husband/wife’, and avoid gendered pronouns, using ‘they’ instead of ‘he/she’. What’s wrong with referring to a man as “he” and to a woman as “she”? Well, the glossary helps us to understand the definition of gender as “a social construct based on a group of emotional, behavioral and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex”.

The whole point of GSLEN is that, if you don’t like the “gender construct” society has assigned you, you can construct another for yourself, and have every right to expect that everyone should go along with you.

As far as students “coming out” are concerned, one should realize that “it can be a difficult and emotional process for an LGBT student to go through, which is why it is so important for a student to have support”. In other words, encourage them by providing approval and support. Whatever you do, however, don’t advise the student not to tell anyone. Why not? Because, the booklet answers, “This implies that there is something wrong and that being LGBT must be kept hidden”.

Gay-Straight Alliances

To help carry out this work there are “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs), student clubs that work to improve school climate for all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. 4,000 GSAs are registered with GLSEN.” The number of GSAs should give some idea of the scope of this organization’s influence. Among the activities sponsored by GLSEN and its affiliates are: the Day of Silence, National Coming Out Day, and GSA Day. On January 24, 2012, Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, gave official government approval of the first GSA Day through a GSA PSA on YouTube commemorating the event and endorsing GSA clubs in schools.  So this is an officially endorsed event.

GLSEN is also hard at work providing role models for LGBT students. NBA player Jason Collins, who plays center for the Washington Wizards basketball team, announced he was a homosexual in an article for the Sports Illustrated website on April 29, 2013. Hardly a week passed before, on May 8, 2013, GLSEN, announced it would honor Collins with the Courage Award at the GLSEN Respect Awards in New York on Monday, May 20. “We are incredibly proud to honor Jason Collins with our Courage Award,” said Dr Byard. “His decision to come out is a game-changer for sports”.

In the classroom

What does this kind of thing actually translate into in the classroom? The film, It’s Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues In School, is the first item recommended on the Book Link page on GLSEN’s website. It’s Elementary is, according to its makers, “the groundbreaking film that addresses anti-gay prejudice by providing adults with practical lessons on how to talk with children about lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered people”. The filmmakers visited six elementary and middle schools to film teachers and students discussing “gay and lesbian issues” in their classrooms. The purpose was to explore “what happens when experienced teachers talk about lesbians and gay men with their students”. It aired on more than 100 public television stations in 1999 and continues to be widely used.

This film is worth some detailed attention not only because of its wide circulation, but because it seems to incorporate what GLSEN advocates. In fact, GLSEN’s founder Kevin Jennings said, “It’s Elementary is the most important film dealing with LGBT issues and safe schools ever made. It took a topic that was mystifying to many people and made it real, inspiring an entire generation of educators to see how they could make a difference…. No other film has had a bigger impact on LGBT issues in the schools.”

Through means of a transcript, let us examine what the film presents. It should be noted that the film is a documentary. Though it obviously has its own strong pro-homosexual point of view, it is simply recording what is already taking place in the schools from first to eighth grade classrooms in the way of inculcating the acceptance of homosexuality as a norm.

At a filmed meeting of the faculty at Cambridge Friends School, a Quaker school in Cambridge, MA, a teacher declares, “What we’re trying to have people do is to understand that people are. And we have to respect the right of all of us to just be, and be who we are, and we do that in the classroom when we teach so that everyone can learn. ‘There isn’t a right way, there isn’t a wrong way, there isn’t a good way, there isn’t a bad way’”. So much for Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. This teaching, however, comports perfectly with the Space Safe Kit’s advice to “Show students that you understand there is no one way a person ‘should’ be”.

This sophistical message obviously works. A 3rd grader summed it up by saying, “I don’t get it. Who cares if you’re gay? Do you care? It’s like, duh, you’re gay”.  Who cares? The entire homosexual lobby, which has been pushing its rationalization to reach this exact point, cares.

In another filmed venue, a first grader at Public School 87 in New York City, Emily, reads to the class from her Mother’s Day essay:

“My mothers mean so, so, so, so, so much to me. I have two mothers. Two moms is pretty nice. Well, it’s more than pretty nice, it’s really nice. You can’t imagine. Although having two mothers is a problem to others, I respect that that’s the way they think, and I can’t do anything about it. I still think that those people think stupidly. This once happened with a boy in my class who couldn’t come to my house because my parents were lesbians. One night I called their house and their mother told me their version of the Bible. I stood up for my mothers and knew that many kids in my class were supporting me and calling me to see how I was. I am proud of my moms and enjoy marching in the gay pride march every single year with my moms.”

Teacher: “Wasn’t that a nice essay? Shouldn’t we give Emily a round of applause?” (Applause )

Evidently, no one has told poor Emily that one of her parents is a dad.

As the responses of the children throughout this film demonstrate, propaganda works. All you have to do is repeat it often enough before their minds are formed. Children can be easily exploited, as the film demonstrates.

Whose children are they?

The background song with the closing credits has these lyrics (taken from Khalil Gibran): “Your children are not your children; They come through you, but they are not from you; And though they are with you, they belong not to you; You can house their bodies but not their souls…”

Well, then, if not their parents’, whose children are they? One may be sure that wherever same-sex “marriage” has been legally enshrined, it will be taught in schools with or without the permission of parents. In this respect, the children will belong to the state and its schools. Massachusetts, which legalized same-sex “marriage” in 2003, is exhibit A.

In 2005, kindergartners in Lexington, Massachusetts, were given a “Diversity Book Bag” to take home, which is what the 5-year-old son of David and Tonia Parker did. To the parents’ shock, it contained a picture book, titled Who’s in a Family? In it, are approvingly displayed same-sex “parents” such as: “Robin’s family is made up of her dad, Clifford, her dad’s partner, Henry, and Robin’s cat, Sassy”. The author Who’s in a Family?, Robert Skutch, explained in a National Public Radio interview, “Here and Now”, May 3, 2005, “The whole purpose of the book was to get the subject [of same-sex parent households] out into the minds and the awareness of children before they are old enough to have been convinced that there’s another way of looking at life”.

The Parkers wrote a letter to the principal stating, “There is a book included entitled, Who’s in a Family (with pictures) that include lesbian and homosexual couples with children – implicitly equating this family structure as a morally equal alternative to other family constructs. We stand firmly against this book or any other subject matter pertaining to homosexuality ever being indoctrinated to our child, discussed in school, or sent home. We don’t believe gay parents constitute a spiritually healthy family and should not be celebrated”. The Parkers requested advance notification of any such material in the future and indicated that they wished to opt out their son from any future exposure “to any sexual orientation/homosexual material/same sex unions between parents”.

The principal responded: “I have confirmed with our Assistant Superintendent and our Director of Health Education that discussion of differing families, including gay-headed families, is not included in the parental notification policy”. On April 27, David Parker, went to the school for a scheduled meeting and insisted that he would not leave until the issue was resolved. As a consequence he was arrested by the Lexington police and charged with “trespassing”. He spent the night in jail.

The next year, at the same school, a second grade teacher read the book, King & King, to the students as part of an educational unit on weddings. In the book, the Queen is frustrated that she cannot interest her son in any of the princesses she presents to him as prospective brides. Then, one day he sees the brother of one of the princesses. “At last, the prince felt a stir in his heart… It was love at first sight”, the book exclaims. The pictorial depiction of the subsequent wedding shows the two “Kings” holding hands. The last picture is of the two of them kissing.

Parents Robb and Robin Wirthlin complained that they had not been notified about the reading or its contents, to which they objected. Robin Wirthlin appeared on CNN, saying, “We felt like seven years old is not appropriate to introduce homosexual themes… My problem is that this issue of romantic attraction between two men is being presented to my seven-year-old as wonderful, and good and the way things should be… Let us know and let us excuse our child from the discussion”.  They were told that the school was under no obligation to notify them or to allow their child to opt out.

In 2006, the Wirthlins and the Parkers filed a federal lawsuit against the school district of Estabrook Elementary School, claiming that the school was engaging in sex education without parental notification, in violation of their civil rights and state law. Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf, of the U.S. District Court dismissed the lawsuit, saying “Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation… [The Department of Education] also encourages instruction concerning different types of families… Some families are headed by same-sex couples”.

The ramifications of his judgment became abundantly clear in 2008, when Dr. Paul B. Ash, the superintendent of Lexington Public Schools, announced the “new, formalized diversity curriculum in preparation for the next year, when we plan to pilot 4 to 5 short units in each elementary grade. Some units will focus on families, including families with single parents, foster parents, and gay and lesbian parents”.  A parent, Shawn Landon, protested, demanding “prior notification to any discussion, education, training, reading or anything at all related (even remotely) to homosexuality”.

Here is part of Dr Ash’s response to the father:

“… perhaps you are not aware of the lawsuit decided by the United States Court of Appeals (Parker vs. Hurley). This case established Lexington’s right to teach diversity units, including stories that show same gender parents. The court decided we are not required to inform parents in advance of teaching units that include same gender parents or required to release students when such topics are discussed. The Appeals Court dismissed the claim that parents have a right to require the school provide advance notice or the right to remove their children. In addition, the School Committee has decided that teachers must be able to teach topics they feel are appropriate without the requirement parents be notified in advance”.

Recall Jean Jacques Rousseau’s prescription for the replacement of the family by the state: “The public authority, in assuming the place of father and charging itself with this important function (should) acquire his (the father’s) rights in the discharge of his duties”. This prescription was filled in Massachusetts. One can expect its spread wherever same-sex “marriage” is mandated by the state.


Back to the classroom, we have another GLSEN publication, Elementary School Toolkit, subtitled Ready, Set, Respect!, to assist the state in its usurpation of parental duties. This booklet advises on how to deal with certain children being perceived as “not behaving ‘enough’ like a boy or ‘enough’ like a girl”. It states: “As educators we have the opportunity to create environments that not only support students as they develop an awareness of gender but that also challenge the stereotypes that may impair healthy development”.

As if on cue, in May 2013, the Tippecanoe School for the Arts and Humanities, a Milwaukee elementary school, sponsored a “Gender Bender Day” for which the students were asked to dress as a member of the opposite sex. “I think it’s just teaching them the wrong lesson about gender”, one parent told local Fox affiliate WITI. “If you’re a boy, stay a boy. You shouldn’t have something like that at school”. Another parent said she was ‘speechless’ about the school’s decision day. She, like some other parents, ended up keeping her son home from school that day. A school-board member dismissed parents’ concerns, saying they were ‘using the kids for political purposes.’ In an effort to appease upset parents, the school changed the name to ‘Switch It Up Day.’ In fact, WITI couldn’t find many students participating in the themed day when it finally came last Friday; it appears to be mostly teachers and other staffers”.  On Fox-6 News TV, one mother protested: “I don’t want to send my son to school dressed as girl. He’s only 7 years old.”

However, this is clearly the age at which some homosexual ideologues and their allies would like to reach children with their propaganda. The extent to which this can go becomes, on occasion, unintentionally hilarious. In the Ready, Set, Respect! booklet, for instance, teachers are advised to “write math problems with contexts that include a variety of family structures and gender-expressions”. For example, “Rosa and her dads were at the store and wanted to buy three boxes of pasta. If each costs $.75, how much will all three boxes cost?” This reads as if some now unemployed Soviet or Sandinista propagandist wrote it. If it were written during the Cold War, they would be buying Kalashnikovs, not pasta but, of course, then there would have been only one dad, not two.

What happened to innocence?

It is a measure of the depravity of the homosexual movement that it will not spare the innocence of children in the spread of its rationalization, which must embrace everyone at every age, regardless of price. Innocence cannot be left to stand in its way. As shocking as some of the classroom and reading material may be, it is all part of the inexorable logic of the situation playing itself out.

Classroom presentations by homosexuals or on the subject of homosexuality are invitations to obscenity and inevitably lead to the question asked by one boy during It’s Elementary: “How do you guys do it?” The response was, “We are not allowed to talk about our personal sex lives – we can’t do that”. Nevertheless, with the question implanted, curious young minds will ineluctably be drawn to the subject of sodomy. “So that’s what those nice guys who talked with us do? There must not be anything wrong with it”. Mission accomplished – to make the abnormative normative before the children have developed their critical faculties of thought.

Everyone who has an affliction deserves respect and consideration. But respect does not require calling the affliction something other than what it is – much less its opposite. One cannot teach about sickness and at the same time call it health. It is much worse to promote moral sickness as moral well-being – especially to children.

To teach children that one’s orientation, sexual or otherwise, gives one license to perform acts that are inherently immoral is an evil teaching. It scandalizes the children. It also degrades the dignity of human free will and responsibility to teach that these acts are inevitable outcomes of “who we are”, rather than as freely chosen deeds with consequences in terms of both moral and physical health.


This article was originally published at MercatorNet

Image credit:

Robert R. Reilly


Robert Reilly has worked in foreign policy, the military, and the arts. His most recent book is The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis. This article courtesy of MercatorNet.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • JMC

    Call it what it is: Once again, the language is being hijacked. To my mind, “partner” refers solely to an “ally,” if you will, whether in business, or in games like pinochle and bridge. My best friend and I, both women, run a farm and are thus partners; however, everyone construes that term to mean that we’re gay (I loathe the L-word with a passion and refuse to use it). Heck, even the word “gay” has been hijacked; no one dares to use it in its original meaning of “happy,” “glad,” or “festive.” You can say a place is “gaily decorated,” but never that the appearance of the place was “gay.”

    The other one that’s been hijacked by popular culture is the phrase “significant other.” In psychology, it simply means a person who has a major influence in our lives; it can be a parent, a sibling, or a friend. In popular culture, it has only one meaning, and that is one with whom you are in an intimate relationship. In our case, people use it as a delicate way of asking if we’re gay.
    So-called “politically correct” language is SO tiresome!

  • Richard III

    Yeah, “gay” used to mean “happy” or “festive”, the rainbow used to be a beautiful sign of God’s promise to never destroy the earth by flood again, pansies used to be pretty garden flowers, “queer” used to just mean “weird”, and “choice” used to mean actually making an informed and (hopefully) good and life-affirming decision.

  • BillinJax

    We must understand that when secular progressives speak of love it is not
    love as spoken of in scripture which as Jude-Christians we know describes the
    predominate characteristic of our Father God and his will for humanity to exist
    in peace in his image in return.

    When Jesus commanded us to love our neighbor, according to the liberal
    agenda prevalent today and the humanist relativism they espouse, it would
    include sexual encounters as part of their definition of love. This permits our
    current president as the progressive’s messiah to preach his personal gospel
    which dictates homosexuals, and he has known a few, should have the blessing of
    his agenda’s fundamentally changed society we live in to marry and be
    recognized as a family. This is nothing less than and open ended attack on and
    redefining of marriage and family.

    As god fearing, not god want-a-Be’s, Christians and Jews we logically understand
    love as scripture informs us is a deep innate spiritual emotion at the very
    center of our faith and not simply a carnal physical passion. Loving our
    neighbor, from our divine understanding, demands respect of his nature as a
    child of God not an opportunity to arouse our nature to satisfy personal
    pleasures with our neighbor or any of his family.

    Those who fall into this liberal trap of theological manipulation have been
    led to believe they are a product of evolution, a mere animated object with a
    single lifetime to enjoy, and not an eternally living creation and part of God’s plan for his ever
    evolving universe. They are content with their finite view of mankind and
    unwilling to elevate themselves above other earthly creatures. Since they do
    not see themselves as offspring of an omnipotent God blessed with the ability
    to procreate with him our own posterity in his likeness but assume themselves
    to more like nature’s evolutionary perfection to this point. They can not
    comprehend the natural results of their physical intercourse, at any stage, to
    be more than flesh and bone.

    That is why they pretend to be in love with the earth, it is all they have.
    We know that God gave us the earth to possess and partake of its abundance. It
    belongs to him and he and only he can or will destroy it as well as renew it as
    he sees fit. Finite man can only destroy
    himself or others but not the earth on which God has placed him. It is simply
    beyond his power. With all of our man made weapons of mass destruction to date
    we can’t begin to compete with the uncontrollable forces of the nature God
    endowed the earth with in the beginning and we continue to witness today.

  • CharlesOConnell

    In 2009, homosexualist-activist Kevin Jennings partnered with Planned Parenthood to host a “sex-education” event now known as [term unworthy of menion] due to the fact that at the event 14-21-year-olds were taught how to perform a dangerous and obscene sexual practice known as [term unworthy of mention]. The same year, Jennings helped fund a pornographic, anti-Catholic and sado-masochistic art display shown at Harvard University.

    Jennings has also admitted to ignoring a case of homosexual statutory rape, when a 15-year-old confided to him when he was a teacher. When told of the homosexual encounter between the boy and a much older man, Jennings, describing himself as “a closeted gay teacher,” told the boy, “You know, I hope you knew how to wear a condom.” The age of consent in Massachusetts is 16 years old.

  • Dan

    Once again, as this article clearly delinates, Christian men and women are being accosted by a minority group with superb social marketing skills, tactical and strategic planning and Madison Avenue positioning plans.

    When, oh when, will we ever put such proactive planning into gear? Does anyone you know have a cohesive, impactful and cogent counter-offensive program ready to be deployed against all this moral madness? Of course not. We just walk around with signs and woefully wait for “something” to be done. We lost half of Europe in the 16th century with this weak-kneed response until the Church woke up and initiated the Counter Reformation. It seems we require great loss before we respond.

    Further more, my fear is that such a comprehensive anti-LGBT initiative would be so laced with “concerns, compassion, etc.” as to render it completely ineffective. We had better begin to set the tone, control the language, educate our kids, attack the media and fight for our faith, our families and our church or there will be little left to fight for.

    Finally, this is another effort that the laity should lead-not the clergy.

  • Peggy

    I was shown “It’s Elementary” in my counselor education program and have received GSLEN kits in my work as an elementary school counselor. We must not leave the defense of innocence to parents alone. Thank you for this important expose; I hope it will inspire many others to join the very real battle to defend the innocence of children and vocally support those who are paying a price for their courage.

  • QuoVadisAnima

    I totally agree, but am also one of the clueless ones woefully waiting & praying for something to be done because I don’t know what else can or should be done – so how do we make such a counter-attack? Hire a Christian business on Madison Avenue ourselves? (Do they even exist there? LOL!)

  • Richard III

    “King and King”
    That story is impossible on 2 points. #1. 2 men (or 2 women) cannot fulfill God’s intended complete, complementary, and life-giving union in true, traditional marriage; and #2. 2 kings in the same country is just asking for civil war, murder, usurpation, intrigue, tyranny, anarchy……..

  • bodhi

    I’d almost care about this, if people cared about the indoctrination of children into religion.

  • Jacob

    I don’t understand what you’d want a guy to do who experiences little to any sexual attraction to women, and only sexual attraction to men. Remain celibate? Try to be in a relationship with a woman? A marriage cannot be cultivated on the grounds of lies and deceit. That will only eat the guy up and cause him torment. Even if he doesn’t act, sexual thoughts cannot go away. And sexual thoughts towards the woman he is with cannot exist given who he is. If he shares such thoughts, that doesn’t create the light in their relationship, in fact, that relationship will always remain dark. Please refer to

    Sexual attraction is at the base, and an important force of fusion in any marriage. God created this just like he created the sun, moon, stars. It’s binds living beings together, and what creates new life given both people are both fertile and of opposite sexes.

    I am pro-monogamy. I am pro-family. I also only experience same-sex attraction. I hated myself for it. I practiced zero sexual expression for years, only focusing on work. And tuned out anything else. I didn’t want to commit a sin, but I also didn’t want to lead a poor woman on. The problem is that you can’t continue that cycle. It burnt me out and caused me much pain. God gave us all a tremendous gift. And that is the gift to fuse 2 bodies into one. To share. To feel. I came out when I found a great guy. Our relationship sadly lasted only a year because he was swallowed in the self-hate you preach.

    It is difficult to find a guy for me not consumed by self-hate. Who has separated love from sex and practices the diabolical act with countless mates. And thus can no longer love. I understand why so many are the way they are. It just makes it difficult for me…

  • Jacob

    You have hijacked Christ’s message and waged an anti-LGBT initiative. You can continue to hate a minority group, but this minority group has nothing against Christ’s message.

    Truly ask yourself where the real damage is coming from against marriage and the family. Look into the mirror and understand the hurt and pain you have caused fellow family members, brothers, and sisters in Christ.

  • Dan

    Thanks for your comment Jacob, but I disagree. I have not hijacked anything Christ said at all. I can only assume (and please comment if I am incorrect) that you are saying this since Christ’s general message is “to love”. I am in no way contradicting that mandate, but please do not mistake “loving” with “approving”. No where did Christ indicate this currently common and politically correct concept. Yet it is frequently voiced. A person can have compassionate love for a person and simultaneously deplore their actions or choices. Every parent would know this reality. So I am not “waging an anti-LGBT initiative” that hates anyone-just the activities they have chosen to embrace. Rather the LGBT group has waged verbal war in just the way you have done it here-by calling us “haters”-yet another step in your political agenda to make such opposition to your opinions to be considered “hate crimes”. So much for tolerance of your community.

    In fact the very term “LGBT” is a collective political term used to aggregate sexual identity and activities rejected by Christ. It is, rather, a battering ram used by this political group to hijack Christ’s message of genuine love of persons from it’s biblical, traditional and authentic meaning. It is this generations political sophistry.

    The damage to marriage and family is already happening due to these misguided political choices. It will affect hundreds of laws in every state requiring “education” about alternate relationships, sexual activities and much more. It will eliminate all gender specific references in formal documents and social activities, ignore the scientifically proven consequences of households without differing sexes, massive gender confusion by young people, state involvement in virtually every avenue of our sexual and interpersonal lives, and hundreds of other consequences.

    I have caused no pain, other than having real love for them and telling them the truth. Yours is the way of calling good evil and evil good and calling the whole political nonsense “tolerance”.

  • Dan

    Not sure what you mean here. Do you think it is wrong to educate our children in our faith beliefs? Or am I misreading your comment?

  • Jacob

    “We had better begin to set the tone, control the language, educate our kids, attack the media” sounds like waging an initiative to me.

    The idea that you feel like there is “the truth” is misguided. Jesus would not have believed that a singular truth is attainable, and in the rabbinical tradition he was a part of, dialogue was important. Asking questions and not having one defined “truth” is the base for all monotheistic religions, and it was only through the political Christian process that changed this among others.

    I never called you a “hater.” I do not think you are a “hater.” I think you are misreading religious text. I have no political agenda. I have a personal agenda, and that is to find a suitable mate for me to spend the rest of my life with. I have struggled with this dialogue my entire life, and I now struggle along with my hetero brothers and sisters as we battle promiscuity and temptation in a world that is filled with it as is described in any monotheistic religion.

  • Dan

    Jacob, please understand we are no wishing hate or anything like that at you. It is a huge burden to bear same sex attraction. The Catholic Church is not asking those who suffer with this to be maligned or excluded or anything like that. Rather, they call you to what they call all of us too-the old word chastity. Priests and consecrated religious in the Catholic Church must remain celibate as a witness to their unique relationship to God-not as a punishment or denial, but an affermation to a special relationship of total commitment to Christ and His Church.

    Married persons are ALSO called to chastity-that is to holy monogamy in marriage-which can also be difficult as many married people find attraction to others sometime in their lives and must fight that “natural” urge as well, regardless of feelings.

    Single people are called to be chaste as well since the act of love making is a total donation to one another for life.

    Finally, Jacob, I must tell you my younger brother was a practicing homosexual for decades so I know the kind of difficulty you face. He eventually got tired of the horrific lifestyle of betrayal, illnesses, etc. that flowed from that lifestyle and he committed himself to living celibate-which was very difficult but in the end redeeming for him. He passed away from brain cancer at 49 years old, after having fought his HIV status for decades too, and that weakened his immune system when he had to fight the cancer.

    I really do understand, and hope you can fight the urge to sell yourself short in this difficult situation you face.

    God bless.

  • Jacob

    And the Catholic Church has supported, defended, and given power to more pedophiles than any other group I can think of.

    I do not think the Catholic is Church is inherently bad. But I do think this “guilt by association” thing is ludicrous.

  • Jacob

    Appreciate your empathy. I tried celibacy, and it is the most unnatural, unhealthy thing I can think of. It also denies you one of the most important things that God has given to us which is the ability to love another human being, know them fully, and through that know and love God. To deny yourself this is not for the faint of heart and requires a specific type of person, of which I am not. Physical is only a part of a spiritual and emotional connection.

    You can deny yourself the ability to truly love another through “the horrific lifestyle of betrayal, illnesses, etc.” which I agree is horrific. I have been drugged, cheated on, and treated like a worthless pile of meat. I continue to do my best to not fall into the world your brother did while being true to myself. It is difficult as most of my peers are not of like-mind.

    When you are given an equation of celibacy or you are a sinner, the person will do what your brother did. He will have sex. He will feel bad about himself. He will continue this path and will end up sick or dead.

  • Jacob

    As well. I cannot express my condolences for your loss. The HIV/AIDS epidemic was a horrible crisis and is a problem that cannot be ignored. I do not feel in danger in falling in the trap that lead your brother there, but it is far too easy of a trap to fall.

    God Bless you and your family.

  • bodhi

    I think our kids’ brains are mush until a certain age and they’ll believe anything, so if we’re wrong about our beliefs we’re unintentionally condemning our kids to believe this stuff anyway. 99% of the time that’s how religions are passed down. Hindu children and Muslim children are the result of the same too-soon religious education. If that’s all everyone in the world does… convince their kids of their religions beliefs at an early age… then the entire world will just always be divided up like it is now, with Hindus raising Hindu kids, Muslims raising Muslim kids, Christians raising Christian kids.

    Shouldn’t we give our kids a chance to decide if they want to get caught up in our culture beliefs? I say we should let them reach the age of reason before flooding them with religion.

  • Dan

    Thanks again for your comments. An initiative is hardly a menacing thing-just a concerted effort to reclaim the language, clearly express beliefs, etc. It is certainly not a hateful movement of any kind or this nation is in trouble given all the various groups who speak out.

    If you don’t believe Jesus had a specific set of guidelines and truth that He expressed I would encourage you to perhaps read the Gospels again. My quoting bible verses here won’t help obviously but He didn’t come to be a social “can’t we all get along” guy LOL. The authorities both secular and religious didn’t kill Him for being too nice or trying to bring people together. No, he called out those who were acting sinfully, expressed love for them and told them not only that there IS one truth-but that He was that truth.

    Asking questions is certainly not forbidden and in fact encouraged by nearly everyone I know. I think ignorance hurts us all, so I’m not sure why you think I don’t encourage questions. But it is important to really consider the response. The rabbinic tradition certainly-like all the major monotheistic religions-is open to questions, dialogue, etc-as has the Catholic Church for over 2000 years. So Jesus believed very much in a singular truth, not a pluralistic one where whatever you believed was fine with Him. Otherwise He wouldn’t have called out the hypocrites, flagrant sinners and yet still died for us all. He claimed to be the ONE and ONLY way to God through this act of love.

    Thanks for clarifying the comment about my being a hater.

    I would really like to know where Jesus embraced some of your thoughts-the one’s I am misreading. So please help me with that.

    I believe you that you have not political agenda. I can certainly understand your desire for mutual love from another. As I mentioned, my brother taught me a great deal about the heartache of this loneliness. Promiscuity and temptation is a curse to us all and as a married man I really don’t know your pain-but please know that while I disagree with your potential remedy for that pain, I will pray it impacts your life less. Pray for me that I, too,l can stay chaste in my life.

  • Dan

    Thanks Jacob. It’s been enjoyable to post with you. Pray for me too. The road is tough sometimes, and I, like you, need strength. Peace.

  • Dan

    Couldn’t pass commenting on this too! LOL. I can tell you of a specific group that has not only had more pedophilia cases by thousands than the Catholic Church and has done NOTHING about it–the New York public school system. No programs, just support from the unions.

    The Catholic Church had a serious problem-even if the % of priests in this issue was less than 1% of priests (still, completely unacceptable) and the school system with over 5%.

    That being said, debating who has the larger problem is a waste of time. We need, all agree, to protect children from WHOEVER might be hurting them. Period.

  • Dan

    Seems I can’t keep quiet here today.

    I think children need guidance and training from the earliest moments in life.

    We don’t leave safety, etiquette, school requirements or anything else up for grabs until they “figure it out”. Virtually all people I have met who have parents like that become totally incapable of rational and critical decision making as adults.

    Rather I think we should, along with teaching our young mush heads, not only WHAT we believe but also WHY. Not just faith, but faith and reason so that when they are indeed old enough to really formulate questions, objections, etc. we operate not from “because I said so” but from a “let’s discuss this rationally” approach. If they reject our teachings as they grow older, that is their right in a free society. But to not instruct, guide and mentor based on our beliefs is a recipe for life long mush “headedness” because they never learned HOW to think.

  • bodhi

    I agree we should teach them how to think, but I still think that they’ll form beliefs for the wrong reasons. I think a lot of the fact that people are falling away is because they didn’t have solid foundations to begin with, because they believed more based on the authority of their parents and their naivety than any other reason. They might rationalize their beliefs with other reasons, but deep down it’s a type of training, and that’s not good. The core should not be the same as a trained puppy.

  • Jacob

    I guess the only thing I’m a hater of is “guilt by association.” You could say the same thing about homosexuals as you could about the catholic church in allowing or having pedophillic behavior. It’s a small percentage. I know of no gay people who have engaged with a minor, and I do know of straight people who have, so… My point is that gay people are no more inherently pedophillic than the catholic church.

    To this end, there are criminals in positions of power everywhere. Preserving childhood is important, and being there as a source to answer questions as a child develops rather than push a specific ideology forward is important. But that’s just my weird opinion that will gain traction no where other than in my own home some day.

  • Jacob

    And I love a lively debate. I like talking to same-minded people, but there are few of them, so talking to opposite-minded people is more interesting! Will have you in my prayers.

  • Jacob

    And a man without the ability to be drawn to a woman cannot fulfill God’s “complete, complementary, and life-giving union” either, so…

    Your reference to 2 kings is pretty funny though. There’s been so much murder because of gay marriage…

  • QuoVadisAnima

    Jacob, have you looked into COURAGE? There are more alternatives available to you than those you mention, but it would be better to walk that path with others who understand what you’re dealing with because they have gone through, or are going through it, too…