Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Conceiving their book as a "gay manifesto for the 1990s," the authors called for homosexuals to repackage themselves as mainstream citizens demanding equal treatment, rather than as a promiscuous sexual minority seeking greater opportunity and influence.
Writing just as the AIDS crisis hit its greatest momentum, the authors saw the disease as an opportunity to change the public mind. "As cynical as it may seem, AIDS gives us a chance, however brief, to establish ourselves as a victimized minority legitimately deserving of America's special protection and care," they wrote.
Give them credit: they really did understand the operation of the public mind. Kirk and Madsen called for homosexuals to talk incessantly about homosexuality in public. "Open, frank talk makes gayness seem less furtive, alien, and sinful; more above board," they asserted. "Constant talk builds the impression that public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizeable bloc--the most modern, up-to-date citizens--accept or even practice homosexuality."
Nevertheless, not all talk about homosexuality is helpful. "And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of the campaign, the public should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex per se should be downplayed, and the issue of gay rights reduced, as far as possible, to an abstract social question."
Portraying homosexuals as victims was essential to their strategy. Offering several principles for tactical advance in their cause, the authors called upon homosexuals to "portray gays as victims of circumstance and depression, not as aggressive challengers." This would be necessary, they argued, because "gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector."
Blindly regurgitating someone else's biased opinion about something, is not actually reading the actual thing itself.
I DO NOT hate homosexuals, I feel sorry for them quite honestly. I DO NOT an any way treat them badly, I am just sick how they push their views on the rest of society by lying and manipulation.
Oh the irony.
That comment just proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that you have not even read the book yourself.
If I had a son, and homosexuals were allowed to be the Scout leaders, I would not allow him to be in the boy scouts. I wouldn't want my son around men who just might find him attractive. I know you will say there is a difference, that that is pedophilia, but I just wouldn't be comfortable with that. Same as If I were to join the military, knowing that in the showers the homosexuals are trying to sneak a peak.
Here's the thing - homosexuals are ALREADY scout leaders and scouts - you just don't know it because they have to keep quiet.
Honestly, I don't think much would change IF the scouts did change their policy. It's not like they spend scout meetings discussing their sexual proclivities. If they do - then your scout is in the wrong group!
I'm much more worried about the 'happily married' Sandusky's of this world who prey on young men.
1. Its not discriminatory its a private group they can allow who they choose,its sad when groups are forced into disgusting acts by forces outside of their own group.
2.They don't need a reason ITS THEIR GROUP! Like I said. The homosexuals should make their own group for non christian homosexual folks...sure they would get a lot of support.
I don't have anything to do with the Boy Scouts but it's their group. The worst thing that can happen is more government intervention which will, of course, entail using force.
I wonder how much money someone can make by forming another group similar to Boy Scouts?
I was a scout leader for several years until my kid discovered baseball. I see no problem with accepting anyone with a disability to scouting . As long as the gay scout knows that it is indeed a disability(mental defect) and does not try to argue otherwise he should have no problems and others should accept him....he should be discriminated on in no way just like a person that is in a wheel chair or has ADD/HD etc.
Being interested in baseball is a disability (mental defect) ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirginiaMountainMan
The homosexual agenda has been rammed so hard down your throat I'm surprised you aren't gagging for air.
Yet you seem to like swallowing far-right propaganda so easily....
If these aren't a couple of straight setup lines for a joke I don't know what is.
Nope, it would much more comforting if the homosexuals would go get psychiatric therapy to help with the mental disorder that they have.
When you talk to the people on your television, do they talk back to you?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
