Homosexual Propaganda Going to All US School Districts

Bob,
I know you cant back it up, but please give me the reference where the CDC says homosexual activity is HEALTHY. Those were your words so wheres the reference. I think homosexuality is unnatural as well. but I might leave morals and God out of it because in thousands of other animal species,homosexuality is present in about 3 % of the population which means that God gave it to them since they dont have free will and choice. Being one of his many creations, maybe HE made 3% of humans that way as well. Doesnt make since to make it a choice for humans but in all other species, its inborn from our maker.

I did not say the CDC said homosexuality. You might want to polish your reading skills; it might help you actually come to grips with how unhealthy and immoral homosexual behavior really is. (Or are you deliberately misrepresenting what I said in order to draw attention away from the unpleasant reality?)

I said that CDC statistics show that homosexual behavior is unhealthy, yet our education system (among others) sends the message to kids that it is healthy.

Also, consider the illogic of your assumption that the 2.9 or 3% of humans (or other animals) that display homosexual behavior is a God-given tendency. Did it not occur to you that such behavior is likely a malfunction of the norm? If a company produced toasters, and 97% of them toasted bread correctly and 3% did NOT work correctly (burned them, froze them, did nothing at all, etc.), would you assume the manufacturer wanted 3% to function differently than the 97%?

Logic and rational thought really helps in exploring and understanding this issue, as it does with everything.

A manufacturer certainly wouldn't want three percent of its product not functioning normally if it could help it at all. But the manufacturer of the animals is God ,who by your analogy, makes mistakes and now three percent of his creations are homosexual. No, dont think so. God is perfectly capable of making all animals straight, unless they are humans who can exercise free will and go against His wishes. So in animals who have no free will, God either made them homosexual(3%) or made a mistake that He could correct today if He wanted.Either way, God allows homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom of which we are a part(special albeit)

Victor, you might want to check what the Bible says about why there are malfunctioning units in creation. God created everything to function perfectly...then humans, with their free will, chose their own way over God's way and brought the curse of death, decay and degradation on all of creation--which had been placed under the dominion of humans.

Unlike animals who operate mostly by instinct--whether fully-functioning instinct or malfunctioning instinct--human beings have free will. They also have a conscience which points them toward moral truth. This conscience can be ignored by using their free will, and they can choose to act contrary to nature and morality.

And because of these differences, animals are not held morally accountable for their actions. Humans, on the other hand, are held accountable. And it will be a very bad day indeed when they are called to account for those repeated refusals to do the right thing.

I'm from Boston Massachusetts and when I went to my local ELEMENTARY school to vote in the presidential election (not for Obama) I happened to notice that the portrait of John F. Kennedy that had been hanging on the wall since the early 1960s was taken down, lay in the corner on the floor and replace by a huge Gay Rights Flag.

Wonderful.

You mean, they didn't just recently discover that John F. Kennedy, like a host of other notable historic figures, was actually "gay?" :-)

You poor, bigoted dinosaur. Pretty soon you and your kind will have died out. Greatly looking forward to the day.

More likely the gays will die out since they don't produce offspring.

I feel embarrassed for you if you seriously think that.

You mean the bigots who push immoral and disease-ridden sexual practices on children, right? The bigots who have declared war on heterosexuality, marriage, family and normality, right? I thought so.

What an interesting post! Thank you for sharing.

My husband and I do not have children yet, and lately we been talking about what we will do when we do and when they are of "school age." We both made it through the public education systems "intact," but we also had parents who carefully policed what we were taught. When I see things like this, more and more, I lean toward private schools or - if I can - homeschooling.

Fastidious

Thanks, Fastidious.

As a homeschooling parent, I can tell you it's a lot of work (my wife--our children's primary teacher--would probably say I don't know the half of it), but both my wife and I would highly recommend it if at all possible. And it is more possible that many people might think.

I made it through the public school system semi-intact...but I learned every single bad habit and almost every erroneous perception on life there. I cringe at the thought of my kids getting what I got 20-30 years ago...and know that it's gone way downhill even since then.

With all the non-academic garbage they throw at kids today, with the stuff get taught by other kids whose parents let them run wild, with the impression kids are given that their faith has no relevance in the "real world" and that it is something they should keep hidden, and the frequently substandard quality of education in general, I can't tell you how pleased we are to know our children are getting a quality education without seeing their moral compass bashed to bits.

How true! Now we must begin to work against the evil of calling left-handedness normal!!!

In case you are unaware, you will be hard--pressed to find a justification for any theoretical branding of left-handedness "immoral," as you will be hard pressed to find any group willing to do so.

Homosexual behavior, on the other hand, is recognized as immoral be every major--and pretty much every minor--religion in existence today. It has also been condemned by pretty much every culture throughout history, never rising to more than a tolerated subset of a few cultures.

And the massive health risks associated with homosexual behavior--none of which are associated with left-handedness--should speak for themselves...for anyone even remotely objective, that is.

Abolition, women's suffrage, interracial marriage, and many other things that we now accept as normal were once condemned by pretty much every culture throughout history - and still are, in many places. I don't put too much stock in the moral judgment of fanatical mobs, and neither should you.

A closer, objective look at these health risks and the circumstances in which they occur will indicate that the underlying problem is irresponsible behavior, not homosexual behavior. It's not some magical coincidence that gay and lesbian people who choose to have sex safely and responsibly in a monogamous relationship are far less likely to experience any of these dangers. I am living proof of that. The next time you read one of your CDC reports about gay men spreading HIV, take a minute to examine the variables that these men have in common. I bet you'll find a striking positive correlation between promiscuous/anonymous/unprotected sex and HIV diagnoses. THAT'S the kind of behavior we should be discouraging, and I don't know a single gay person who would say otherwise.

And yes, it's true that you don't often see anyone condemning left-handedness as immoral. But religion can make people think all sorts of nonsensical things. If 1 Corinthians had said, "Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers nor those who write with their left hand will inherit the kingdom of God," you would believe it.

That's a good point about the mob; the majority frequently doesn't get it right.

But they often do. And it's interesting that everything points to the validity of rejecting homosexuality as moral and normal. From the moral condemnation from God, to the design for human sexuality that God made clear from the beginning forward, to the obvious correct and incorrect use of our sex organs, to the problems with disease and injury which can come with these practices--even without the promiscuity factor--to the mental and emotional toll this behavior usually takes on people...everything just points to the conclusion that any reasonable person can see: it's ill-advised.

If you are honest about the rate of truly monogamous relationships in the homosexual community, you will admit that you are very rare. Report after report after report--many of them compiled by people favorable to homosexual behavior--shows phenomenally high rates of promiscuity, fleeting relationships and very little monogamy of any kind. And this behavior is simply one of many reasons why people should be counseled to avoid this behavior.

If God said there was something immoral about left-handed people, I have enough confidence in him from everything I've seen from him being right and true and good that I would take him at his word that he had a good reason for it.

But he didn't did he?

Maybe there's a reason he had no moral condemnation for left-handedness (because there's obviously nothing immoral about it), while he had loads of it for homosexual behavior (violating his design for human sexuality...in addition to the mountain of practical reasons to avoid it).

Of course couples like me and my partner are rare. But if you think about it, the fact that you and your wife have been married and faithful to each other for years makes you a rarity as well.

If I wanted to, I could make a case for outlawing heterosexual relationships simply by citing the astronomical rates of promiscuity and infidelity among heterosexuals, and the fact that the majority of marriages end in divorce. Yet the choice of most married couples not to honor and value their relationships has not disqualified rare couples like you and your wife from receiving legal protection.

Why shouldn't the same be true for me? Is the irresponsible behavior of *other* people a justifiable reason to make *my* relationship illegal?

Not as rare as monogamy in the homosexual community--not by far. Can you say, "Hen's teeth?" I knew you could.

You could make a case for outlawing heterosexual relationships...except for the fact that God ordained it to be that way, our sex organs and nature practically scream at us that it's supposed to be that way, 97.1% of the population acknowledges with their behavior that heterosexuality is normal, and the behavior common in the homosexual community only serves to further endorse the correctness of married heterosexual relationships. Yep, except for those inconsequential things, you certainly could.

Rational societies don't make rules, laws and define accepted practices based on exceptions rather than the rule.

I've linked to your post from BlogWatch Education which is a watch on developments in public schools that Christian parents should be interested in.

Thanks, Wayne! I appreciate the good work you're doing!

Thanks for the kind words.

1: First off, 2.9% of the population equates to 8,810,914. So, I guess that it isn’t “normal” to be from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, or Colorado COMBINED. In the grand scheme of things since we, South Dakotans, make up such a small percentage of the population perhaps we should be ignored since we don’t matter in your opinion. We are not even large enough to make up a “community” according to you.

2: Male and Female sex organs are also used to dispose of bodily waste, and we still stick things in there. It that normal? Pretty gross if you ask me. Think about how many times a day we use those organs to dispose bodily waste rather than procreate.

3: Brain trusts in the education system are possibly seeking to define morality as treating EVERYONE equally with the love and respect that you would want. Not just the people that look, talk, and act like you.

4: The tag line should be while the health risks associated with non-protected sex are becoming more and more commonly known–with agencies like the CDC, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Interestingly enough the “normal” penetrated sexual organ of the female also accounts for the vast majority of HIV AIDS cases for women. I don’t deny the facts of MSM homosexuals being the leading cases in HIV or AIDS in men, however heterosexual sex is the leading cause for women. Unhealthy sexual practices have to stop. Sex without commitment has to stop.

You sure are scared. The morality of America is truly unraveling with narcissists that hold only to their opinions, their mottos, and their religion is the only truths. There has to be a common ground that we can walk on, but everyone has to give a little bit. How about this, Bob? I will give up being a homosexual if you convert to Judaism. You can show me how to be straight, and I can teach you how to be Jewish!!! Fun for the whole family!

Most people in the United States aren't from South Dakota, so you would indeed consider it a bit unusual to encounter someone from South Dakota in, say, New York City. An important difference, however, is that while it's a bit abnormal to run into a South Dakotan in a larger metropolitan area outside the state, being from South Dakota isn't unnatural, nor is it immoral or unhealthy--as homosexual behavior is.

I was of course talking about the sexual function of the male and female sex organs. The sexual use of these sexual organs is obvious, is it not? The dual role of waste disposal associated with these areas is also a natural function of those areas. What homosexuals do with those organs is, again, not natural, practical, or an intended function.

If the brain trusts in the education system truly cared about showing love and respect for everyone, they would warn young people away from this immoral, unnatural and unhealthy practice. If you saw someone about to stick their hand into a nest of rattlesnakes, would you say nothing, or would you warn them? Would you hand them a booklet that told them it was normal, moral and healthy to stick their hand in a den of rattlesnakes...or would you do everything you could to dissuade them? Obviously this brain trust is more concerned about being politically correct, ensuring they are firmly ensconced within the herd, and are well-liked by those who prefer the easy path.

You are indeed correct that heterosexual sex is the primary method of AIDS transmission for women. Again, the use and misuse of the female sex organs makes it obvious why one transmits the virus more easily than the other. It is also pretty obvious, if over 70% of AIDS cases in men are associated with homosexual behavior, how these women are getting infected through heterosexual contact: bisexual activity on the part of these men. And if these women--and men-were waiting until marriage to have sex as they should, then the AIDS epidemic would almost completely go away, wouldn't it?

You are right that it is scary to see America disintegrating before our eyes. However, compromising with error, finding "common ground" with immorality and so on is not a way to make things better. How about just a little bit of poison in your supper tonight?

The answer is to give up our immoral ways and pursue what is right, uncompromisingly.

I would love to learn more about Jewish culture. As a Christian, my faith grew out of the Jewish nation and religion, and I am very interested in that adopted heritage. I have attended several Seder services led by Messianic Jews, and am fascinated with the history and heritage of this sacred service.

You would be a lot better off by now if you had stopped trying to PUSH your agenda on everyone else. I have got nothing against gays except that they seem to have something against everyone else. They have taken over education and now it has become indoctrination.

"And if these women--and men-were waiting until marriage to have sex as they should, then the AIDS epidemic would almost completely go away, wouldn't it?"

Oops, Bob. You do realize you've just cited a reason FOR gay marriage, right? Accepting and embracing homosexuality will give gay people less cause to be so sneaky about it.

Oops, you keep forgetting that it takes a man and a woman to form a marriage!

Besides, the data already coming in from places where this sort of insanity has been legitimized is indicating that homosexuals have an elevated rate of dissolution of their relationships. Not surprising since we've also recently begun to learn that more often than not, even when homosexual couples claim they are "monogamous," they're still involving outside sexual partners. You're not going to stop the spread of disease if you're not even honoring the definition of "monogamy," much less "marriage."

Being called insane by an evangelical... I love it.

Does the reported dissolution rate of gay relationships even come close to rivaling the 50/50 crapshoot that heterosexual marriages have at making it to the five-year mark? And are you seriously going to argue that the rate of separation and infidelity among gay couples is sufficient reason not to make their relationships legal? Because if that were true for straight couples, marriage would have been outlawed centuries ago!

Yes, it's even higher than the divorce rate seen among heterosexuals. And that 50% divorce rate figure is slightly misleading; that figure comes from the fact that there are some people who get married 3, 4, or more times and skews the numbers--these are people who were never serious about their vows and know nothing about marriage to begin with. And even with these anchors around our ankles, the homosexual dissolution rate is still higher.

The fact that homosexuals tend to make even more of a joke of commitment, monogamy and fidelity is a good reason to to further water down the institution of marriage by allowing them to call their unions by that name.

But as I've said, there are a host of other, better reasons not to lend any legitimacy to homosexual behavior by allowing homosexuals to call their unions "marriage," the best being that it takes a man and a woman to form a marriage, and a homosexual relationship by definition excludes one or the other necessary elements to form a marriage.

How nice of you to associate gay people with a giant biohazard symbol!

Be honest for a change, cinema. Even homo-advocacy groups strongly recommend wearing a "glove" when "handling" an anonymous, one-night partner.

With the drastically elevated disease rates and other health risks associated with homosexual behavior, it's appropriate.