'Homosexual' Hate

Girls Told to Ask for Lesbian Kiss at School

Parents of children attending a Red Hook, New York, middle school are outraged after a recent anti-bullying presentation at Linden Avenue Middle School.

The workshop for 13 and 14-year-old girls focused on homosexuality and gender identity. They were also taught words such as "pansexual" and "genderqueer."

Parents say their daughters were told to ask one another for a kiss and they say two girls were told to stand in front of the class and pretend they were lesbians on a date.

"She told me, 'Mom we all get teased and picked on enough. Now I'm going to be called a lesbian because I had to ask another girl if I could kiss her,'" parent, Mandy Coon, told reporters.

Coon says parents were given no warning about the presentation and there was no opportunity to opt-out. Both the school principal and the district superintendent are defending the workshops and advising they will schedule more.

"The school is overstepping its bounds in not notifying parents first and giving us the choice," another parent said. "I thought it was very inappropriate. That kind of instruction is best left up to the parents."

"I was absolutely furious -- really furious," a parent who asked to remain anonymous told reporter Todd Starnes, "These are just kids. I'm dumbfounded that they found this class was appropriate."

Superintendent Paul Finch told The Poughkeepsie Journal the presentation was "focused on improving culture, relationships, communication and self-perceptions."

"We may require more notification to parents in the future," Finch said.

He claimed the sessions are required under the state Dignity for All Students Act, which prohibits harassment and bullying in the classroom.

Principal Katie Zahedi and guidance counselors at the middle school worked with Bard students to organize the workshops.

Most so-called 'homosexuals' have self-identified as such as a result of some sexual trauma(s), which most shrinks refuse (or are not allowed) to acknowledge as trauma and California has made illegal to treat.

The physical reality of their heterosexual biology makes sexual reproduction impossible. They have only recruitment as a means of propagation. Since they were recruited through sexual abuse, it follows that their recruitment would resort to precisely the same method.

Instead of admitting their fear, grief, shame, even horror at what has been done to them, they pridefully insist that their delusion is reality and even go so far as to demand other innocents suffer the same way they do. All in order to justify their denial.

This case overflows with self-righteous hypocrisy. Homosexuals bully children into homosexual acts in order to ostensibly train them not to be bullies. It is irrefutably clear that indoctrination is the goal. Institutionalized sexual abuse, like in the case described in this article, constitutes an atrocity and arises from hatred, which so-called 'homosexuals' feel for the other 97% of us who are not afflicted with their particular type of sexual confusion.

There Are No Homosexuals

We often identify ourselves and others by the things we do or like doing. "He's a golfer." "She's a bowler." "I'm a truck driver." "She's an accountant." Children are often asked what they want to be when they grow up. Some may say, "I want to be a fireman". Others say, "I want to be a movie star". In ages gone by, a child might say, "I want to be president."

Forever ago, an episode of The Partridge Family consisted of the eldest child, David, being left in charge while the mother was away. The other children resented his authority and tried to make his job miserable. In an effort to frustrate him, his siblings hatched a plan. The two youngest children asked him for advice about what to be when they grow up. David encouraged them saying, "you can be anything you want to be." They responded, "we want to be Black." Hilarity ensued.

Of course, we understand the difference between being a particular vocation or having a particular hobby on the one hand and being a particular race on the other. The former has its basis in what we like and what we do. The latter is irrevocably rooted in our biological nature.

But we still talk about them both in the same way. "I am White." "I am an artist." It's no wonder we do the same thing when discussing homosexuality. We identify people according to their sexual behavior and desires by calling them homosexuals and heterosexuals. We then proceed in our discussion as if we have identified them by their biological nature, forgetting even to consider whether we are talking about growing up to be a fireman or growing up to be Black.

The heterosexuality of human beings is intrinsic to our nature. It is an obvious, irrefutable, biological fact of our species. One aspect of the definition of being human is heterosexuality. Each of our bodies is designed to fit together and to function in union with a body of the opposite sex.

Now, this fact does not prevent us from trying to find sexual satisfaction from all other things in the world, whether living or inanimate. But human desire is not always in sync with reality. Sex with a four-legged animal or a motorized device, or desire for it, does not change one into a four-legged animal or a motorized device. A human remains human regardless of his behavior. Human beings are heterosexual.

However, it is not technically incorrect to say that someone 'is gay'. But it's important to understand the only thing this can mean is that he has chosen to identify with homosexual activity in the same way a golfer identifies himself as one who is active in that sport.

But, if I were willing to risk validating the concept of 'hate speech', I might accuse of 'hate speech' those who say a person is 'born gay'. Essentially, such an assertion denies the humanity of those who engage in homosexual acts. One would be labeling another as inhuman because of their sexual behavior. I, on the other hand, insist that those who identify themselves as homosexuals are, in fact, human beings. By virtue of their humanity, and in spite of their behavior, it is impossible for them to have been 'born gay'.

Some who have correctly asserted that "homosexuality is a choice" have been asked, "when did you chose to be heterosexual?" This question intentionally confuses the two different ways in which we understand 'being'. But identity as homosexual has desire and behavior as its only basis. In contrast, identity as heterosexual has physical reality as its basis, which is then reinforced by desire and behavior. The answer to the question is, "I didn't need to choose to be heterosexual because I am comfortable with my sexuality. I accept who I really am."

CA Schools Promote Gender Confusion

Calif. School Tells Elementary Students There Are More Than 2 Gender ‘Options’

The trainer also told the children that this diversity applies to human beings as well. It is this rationale — that gender is pliable and that there are “more than two options” — that has some people frustrated.

There are moral implications for all this, but more central to what is being taught are common sense and biological facts. When you bring evolution into the discussion, you are talking about biology. Humans are not clown fish. In the context of human biology, there are only two genders. It‘s also worth pointing out that neither of them is an ’option’. We don’t get to choose our gender. Technology may someday allow the choice, but for now, we are stuck with what we’re born with. Cosmetic surgery doesn’t change the reality. That is the plain and simple biological fact. Teachers and whoever else is behind teaching this nonsense to children should be held publicly accountable for such drivel.

Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

What about communists? Should they be welcomed into the conservative fold as well? GOProud claims to be a conservative group while promoting the cultural acceptance and normalization of gender confusion and homosexual acts.

CPAC’s Culture Club

“The issue is not that GOProud works on only four of the five traditional items on the conservative agenda — rather, it omits — because it actively opposes — one part of the core,” according to the official boycott letter that was sent to CPAC chairman David Keene in late November, signed by Cannon, Gary Bauer (president of American Values), Brian Brown (president of the National Organization of Marriage), and Mathew Staver (president of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University’s law school). “It is no more acceptable as a participant at CPAC than a group that said it embraced the ‘traditional conservative agenda’ but actively worked for higher taxes and greater governmental control of the economy,” the letter continues.
[...]
Last fall, Barron all but “wrote Jim DeMint out of the conservative movement,” as Cannon tells it. In the heat of the midterm campaigns, GOProud joined liberals in attacking DeMint over comments he made about religious freedom and education — comments that bore no connection to any kind of legislative initiative. Barron has also said (on MSNBC, again) that DeMint — who’s now considered a Tea Party kingmaker — “has given up the ability to lead on any issues conservatives care about.”
[...]
This point was at the core of the November boycott letter: “We believe that, in general, the conservative movement is strengthened by the presence within it of organizations that give priority to particular, even single, issues. It is not necessary for each group within a political movement to embrace the fullness of a detailed and defined philosophy. But it is necessary for each group within any coherent movement not to stand in diametrical opposition to one or more of its core principles. It is our conviction that the institution of marriage and the family qualify — historically, philosophically and empirically — as such core principles. An organization committed to the ultimate abandonment of the legal and social meaning of marriage by definition disqualifies itself from recognition as a partner in the conservative cause.”
[...]
In the final analysis, GOProud may be doing conservatism a real service. The organization is helping a movement and party discern how to deal in a principled and prudent way with fundamental, personal issues in the political realm — in the contentious public square of a fallen world.

I have to respond to one point that is not central to the article, but is critical to GOProud's agenda:

GOProud presents itself as a victim. “The reason the boycotters applied a litmus test to us is because we were born gay,” its executive director, Jimmy LaSalvia, told the New York Times, where the controversy was featured this weekend.

Human beings are not gay. Human beings are, by definition, heterosexual. It's an obvious biological fact. That reality doesn't prevent us humans from participating in homosexual acts. But our identity as human beings is permanent and irrefutably heterosexual.