Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
12.10.25 Imploding Gay Power

12.10.25 Imploding Gay Power

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0|Likes:
Published by nowayborngay

More info:

Published by: nowayborngay on Nov 02, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/02/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Imploding Gay Power
By Philip Irvin
Gay power has made stunning advances due to a well-orchestrated falsehood; the claimthat homosexuality or heterosexuality is fixed at birth. If this falsehood can be exposed andcountered, gay power will crash.Many believe that gays are “born that way” —that there is an organic basis for homosexuality. Most who believe this, would not deny homosexuals “equal rights”— including marital rights—simply because of an accident of birth. Such people support gayobjectives out of 
compassion
; compassion that too often overrides their own theological beliefs. The more we fight their compassionate response the more determined they are tosupport the “victimized” gay community.For many who are reluctant to resist intimidating gay power, accepting the “born gay” belief can be inviting: If they can make themselves believe it, they are able to view their lack of opposition as compassion rather than cowardice. Even ambivalence over whether  people are born gay can cripple a person’s resistance to gay political advances.While dispelling the myth of “born gay” may seem a daunting task, it is insteadsurprisingly easy. You only have to do two things: (1) Discredit “born gay” studies.Various studies supposedly “prove” an organic basis for homosexuality. Rather thanexamining them individually, these studies can all be effectively and summarily disgraced.(2) Show that the “born gay” thesis is a ridiculous idea. Without the support of gay studies,the “born gay” thesis almost collapses by itself.For the first point look at an increasingly common situation: After 22 years of marriage,Fred dumps his wife Sue to go off with Mike, his new lover. It is a cardinal rule of gayideology that Fred did not
convert 
to homosexuality. Rather he always was gay but just
 
now
came out 
as gay.With this emerging problem, you would think that someone getting married might want torun tests ensuring he or she really is marrying someone of the stated orientation. But itdoesn’t work that way. A person can in all ways act straight and swear on a stack of phone books that he/she is straight, but that’s not conclusive proof. Likewise a person can act andclaim to be gay, but later events can show he was just “confused” and wasn’t gay at all. A person’s intrinsic sexual orientation, apparently, is determined by what the personeventually declares him/herself to be.This leads to an interesting question: “What percentage of the population dies beforefinally acting on their true orientation? Obviously some, but under this perspective, it isentirely possible that
everyone
is homosexual, but most die before coming out. It is also possible that everyone really is heterosexual and those who assert otherwise are only“confused.” So while some assert that homosexuality is an inherent, unchangeablecharacteristic, it follows that it is impossible to say who has it -
nothing can be presented as conclusive proof.
This problem trashes all research supporting an organic basis for sexual orientation.
 If aman can’t tell that his wife and sexual partner of 22 years was a lesbian, how can aresearcher tell a persons' orientation with a 15-minute interview and perform valid studieson what caused it?
Any study of the cause of sexual orientation needs some criteria to say who is and who isnot gay. If Fred were evaluated when he was connected with Sue, the criteria would havehad to determine that he was straight. If the criteria were used when Fred was with Mike itwould have said Fred was gay. So the same study that tried to prove that homosexuality isan inherent, unchangeable condition would also have been forced to conclude that Fredconverted from straight to gay.
2
 
With this internal inconsistency, you can declare all such studies, “mush.”Without the protective covering of “convincing” gay studies we work on the second point.Remember that
the laws of evolution and of genetic succession are particularly harsh onany trait that prevents reproduction.
So let’s start with a simple formula that paints a stark  picture:
“One gay man + one gay man = zero gay children.”
Or we can look at the female side of the picture: You can go back maybe ten generationsand assume any fertility rates (number of children per woman) for lesbian and straightwomen and calculate the outcome. Even a slight difference would cause a gay gene torapidly fade from the population. On the other hand, if the fertility rates were the same,how could women be considered lesbians if they were having the same amount of heterosexual sex to produce an equivalent number of children? Even if a
tendency
towardhomosexuality were genetic, every time that gene expressed itself, it would fall out of thegene pool.Although there can be no genetic basis for homosexuality, other speculations about anorganic basis persist. Perhaps a chemical imbalance causes it. Perhaps a different pre-natalenvironment causes it.The problem with any of these speculations is that the gay community claims 10% of the population—some 30 million Americans—are gay. If this number of people had a biological condition that prevented reproduction, would we not be awash with studiestrying to find a cause and cure? And why are gays not clamoring for such studies that,supposedly, would prove the cause of their homosexuality?In conclusion, having disproved an organic basis for homosexuality, it follows thathomosexuality is caused by personal choices although they may be very heavily influenced by a person’s environment and experiences. Homosexuality is not a human
characteristic
;
3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->