Yes, Gay Activists are After Your Children

By Michael Brown Published on July 6, 2017

For years we have heard that the homosexual movement cannot grow by reproduction, so it must grow by seduction, especially in our schools. Gay activists have been deeply offended by that statement, and for good reason, since it makes them out to be a bunch of pedophiles and child molesters. The truth be told, there are plenty of heterosexual pedophiles and child molesters, including female teachers who have sex with underage males.

But while the “seduction instead of reproduction” statement is an ugly and unfair exaggeration, what cannot be denied is this: The homosexual movement seeks to grow by the indoctrination of our children, from toddlers to pre-schoolers, and from elementary school to college. LGBT activism thrives on indoctrination.

It is true that some gay adults actively seduce underage children, using school-based GSA’s (Gay Straight Alliances) and other means to lure them in, as groups like Mass Resistance have clearly documented. (If you don’t believe me, click on this link.)

But most of the important work is done by indoctrination. It is planned, it is systematic, and it is effective.

‘Convince Children as Young as Four’

At a 2015 teacher’s conference in Canada, lesbian kindergarten teacher Pam Strong explained “how she uses her classroom to convince children as young as four to accept homosexual relationships.”

She said, “With [the principal’s] encouragement, we decided that I would go from class to class and talk about what ‘gay’ means, what does ‘LGBTQ’ mean, what do ‘I’ mean.”

She also read the gay book King and King to these little ones, and when she got to the part about the two princes being “married,” one of the little boys suddenly shouted out: “They can’t do that! They can’t get married. They’re two boys.”

She explained to him that, yes, they did do it, right there on p. 12, to which the boy protested that it was just a story, not real life.

Strong replied, “It happens in real life too. I am married to a woman. I am gay. And I am in love with my wife.”

And with that, the kids were silenced. I guess being gay is OK after all!

Worldwide Indoctrination — It’s Not New

What’s striking, though, is that this is not some isolated incident that took place in Canada. It’s happening all over America (and other nations) in hundreds (or thousands) of classrooms, and it’s been happening for many years.

For example, in England, as far back as 2006, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) stated that, “It is particularly important to begin to make three to five-year-olds aware of the range of families that exist in the UK today; families with one mum, one mum and dad, two mums, two dads, grandparents, adoptive parents, guardians etc.”

And already in 2005, Kevin Jennings, then the Executive Director of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Educational Network), noted that, in 1995, “Fewer than a hundred gay-straight alliances existed,” whereas in 2005, “Nearly 3,000 schools have GSA’s or other student clubs that deal with LGBT issues.”

Today, there are more than 900 GSA’s registered in California alone, with younger and younger kids being exposed to them. That means that your 12-year-old daughter can come out to her peers and her gay teachers at school without your knowledge. And this interaction and affirmation (and more) can go on for years, again, without your knowledge.

And let’s not forget that, for some years now, California has had mandatory LGBT history classes for all children in public schools, grades K-12, without exception and without the ability to opt out.

Talk about indoctrination. And this is entirely aside from the bombardment that comes your child’s way every day through the media and social media.

Drag Queens and Toddlers

At this point, though, you might be wondering: Well, who among us didn’t know about this already? You and others have been talking about it for years. Why write yet another article on it?

It’s because of videos like this on YouTube, featuring a bearded man in drag educating kids from 3-7 about what it means to be a drag queen. (I urge you to click on the link if you haven’t and just look at the picture. This is why I speak up once again.)

It’s because more and more drag queens are reading to your kids in libraries, beginning with kids as young as two. (To call this anything less than a perversion of the highest order is to remain silent in the face of evil. And yes, I’m calling this evil.)

Just look at this picture (please, please click on the link), where the Boston Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (drag queens again) read stories to little children sitting at their feet in a library. Since I wrote about this and spoke about this one month ago, it’s becoming more common.

Talk about indoctrination. Talk about coming out of the closet with no holds barred. Talk about having nothing to hide anymore. Yes, it’s time to put drag queens on display for toddlers!

Targeting a Jewish Girls School

And I write about this subject again because of an absolutely horrific situation in England, where an Orthodox Jewish school for girls 3-8 fell afoul of the government because it failed to educate the children about being transgender or lesbian.

But why should it? For heaven’s sake, this is a school for Orthodox Jewish girls. Is nothing sacred anymore?

As reported on a Christian website two weeks ago, “Vishnitz Girls’ School in north London first came under scrutiny with an unannounced emergency inspection in February 2016, after safeguarding concerns were raised. The school’s categorisation fell from ‘good’ to ‘standards not met’.”

What was the reason for the “unannounced emergency inspection”? What standards has the school not met? The report overall is very positive, pointing to the school’s many excellent qualities and the fine results it is getting. What then was the problem?

The problem was that they didn’t teach three-year-old girls that perhaps they’ll be attracted to other girls when they grow up, which, of course, is fine and good. They didn’t teach five-year-old girls that, perhaps, they’re really boys trapped in girls’ bodies, and when they get older, they can become boys.

Yes, “It doesn’t matter how good your school is in all other respects –simply refusing to teach very young children about gender reassignment will lead to your closure. That is the possible outcome for not only this school, but other Jewish schools which refuse, as a matter of faith, to teach about LGBT issues.”

Indoctrinate With Truth

Sadly, I could give almost endless examples of this kind of pressure and abuse and indoctrination, and I’ve written long chapters in books on this along with scores of articles. But for those who are still living in denial, please do face the facts. For years now, LGBT activists have been coming after your children, and their strategy has been immensely successful so far.

It’s up to us as parents and educators and pastors and leaders and young people and old people to fight fire with fire, to get more involved in our schools, to get our message out, and to indoctrinate kids with the truth.

We can teach them to be loving and kind to everyone, especially those who seem different, without teaching them to affirm that which is contrary to God’s design and plan.

And whatever we do, we best do it on our knees, crying out for divine intervention. Without that, this ship has long since sailed.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Gary

    When I was in a government grammar school, in the late fifties and early sixties, in the South, most of my teachers were Christians. Church attending, Bible believing Christians. Teaching acceptance of homosexuality would have been unthinkable. Any teacher that would have dared try that not only would have been fired, they would have been run out of the state. Parents would not have tolerated it. Today, society is FAR more immoral than it ever has been. Parents let teachers teach their children that homosexuality is ok. If the parents don’t care, it will continue.

    • dave jones

      I agree but understand this. This “progressive” secular humanism in this nation now has the largest workers union in the nation (NEA) on board with their agenda. They have most of the MSM (mainstream media) and Academia (professor’s) and they are quite clever and forceful in their leadership. In other words, In this culture war, if you and me as grandfathers and all the parents that are against their agenda don’t get involved, it will surely continue and we will lose. Thanks Gary for sharing.

      • Gary

        Everyone in my immediate family took the kids out of government schools years ago. But, we still pay taxes to fund the immorality that goes on in those schools. Locally, we elected a “Christian” woman to head the school board, but it didn’t help. She won’t do anything to try to stop the homosexuals from having their way. I know what to do to fix the problem, but it is illegal.

        • Az1seeit

          Please do not judge her. The problem is not the people – the Christian school board president – but the fact that it is a public school subject to the government. You may have noticed that Judeo Christian morals are under attack in our country. We in the public schools are required to toe THEIR line or we are disciplined. The closer I get to the Lord, the less I can hide it, nor want to. While I currently teach in an area of the country that is majority Judeo Christian, the handwriting is on the wall… it will come down to Him or my job at some point.

          • Gary

            You will either have to find another job, or go along with the sodomites. Unless the laws change. But I don’t have a lot of hope for that happening.

    • eddiestardust

      One of my elementary school teachers, in Dallas, in the 1960’s did indeed read from the Bible!

      • Dominic Lombardo

        From the King James Version, I assume. That’s why school prayer and Scripture reading, as then practiced, had to go out of the public schools – because they were used for decades as a tool to attempt to equate being a good American with being a Protestant, and to induce Catholics and Jews to apostasize.

  • No one needed to indoctrinate ME, Michael. I simply learned to accept myself.

    • Paul

      Accept what about yourself?

    • Matthew

      If you consider yourself a person of Faith you should be most concerned about what God accepts and this is true for all of us.

      • Jason Todd

        He doesn’t. He is an atheist.

    • Jason Todd

      As what?

      • Seamrog

        Chuck’s only identity is wrapped up with all things behind his zipper.

        He was very likely molested as a child by an adult relative and is a walking wound.

        • John Connor

          No more so than your own.

    • Thisoldspouse

      I’m sure some older male ‘taught’ you what homosexuality was at a very young, tender age.

      Seriously, how old were you when you had your first sexual encounter, if you can be honest for once?

      • John Connor

        Pushing old worn out lies, eh? So sad.

        • Thisoldspouse

          Nice deflection. And the very pertinent question wasn’t directed to you.

          • John Connor

            Matters not who it was directed to

    • Thisoldspouse

      If you are a Christian, you are commanded to deny yourself.

  • Paul

    If they can’t reproduce they must recruit

    • John Connor

      They reproduce through ivf, artificial insemination, and surrogates on a regular basis just infertile heterosexual couples.

      • Jason Todd

        But they cannot reproduce unless both sperm and ovum are present.

        • John Connor

          Matters not….

          • Jason Todd

            Is that supposed to be a troll post?

            Because it is so jaw-droppingly stupid….

          • John Connor

            Opinions vary …..

          • Jason Todd

            Any opinion that includes the creation of life not involving sperm and ovum isn’t worth hearing because it’s an entry in the Stupid Hall of Fame.

          • John Connor

            Any of the methods I posted involve both, mr wizard. Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it??

          • Jason Todd

            None of that is the point, is it? Same-sex couples cannot reproduce on their own. Period.

          • John Connor

            Neither can infertile heterosexuals.

          • Jason Todd

            Irrelevant.

          • eddiestardust

            Your parents , grandparents, great grandparents didn’t believe what you are saying else you wouldn’t be here:)

          • John Connor

            My entire family, with the exception of my wife and kids, are deceased. Im here to post on a public forum my opinion.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Infertility does not mean impossible

      • Thisoldspouse

        The products of a man and a woman are REQUIRED, is the point.

        • John Connor

          And?

  • Debbie Hester

    I’m a public school teacher in Georgia. Recently, an article in our local paper informed citizens that our superintendent has held an informational meeting with the school nurses to help them discuss gender identities.
    The program “Welcoming Schools” seek to indoctrinate children as young as 5 years old to identify their gender according to their desires. School nurses would then help this child accept his/her decision. No where is it mentioned that parents would even be notified.
    As a 6th grade teacher, I’m extremely concerned about being “educated” on gender issues. The article in the paper even mentioned how the Common Core Curriculum aligns with this “indoctrination.”
    Last year, our classes went to see a play in Atlanta based on a Muslim girl being bullied in her school. I don’t care who you are bullying is NOT acceptable. The study guide to accompany the play “explained” how the Islam religion worships the one true God, Allah. When I objected to this play, you would have thought that I had committed the unpardonable sin.
    I’m so worried about our children and how these issues are coming in the back door so that no one will be the wiser.
    Thank-you, Dr. Brown for informing people about the current disturbing issues in our country and world.

    • dave jones

      thanks for sharing that, Debbie.

    • allie B

      Bless you for hanging in there. There are some things you might try to make the last couple of years you are in the system more efficacious. I have friends who teach in public school because this is where they feel their influence is most needed (while keeping their own children home, may I add). Many are considering throwing in the towel. You can’t teach “religion” but you can teach truth and virtue. Have you considered starting your classes each day with a catechism of sorts? Classroom rules – a list of the virtues with definitions – for example, that your students recite as a group every day (and, no, tolerance is not one of those virtues). Carefully word things – if forced to present material that says “Allah is…” word it something like”Muslims believe that their god, Allah, is the one true god”. Any questionable material you are compelled to present, preface with “some people believe…” or “it is written in your text that some people believe…” carefully present the material in a way that does not portray the ideas as truth, simply that some people believe these ideas; but not in a way that administrators can put a finger on anything they may see as “wrong”.

      “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves.”

      I don’t know how Georgia organizes sixth grade – if you teach all or most of their classes, or just a subject or block of subjects, but I might have some suggestions on how to gracefully make inroads with truth, goodness, and beauty. I don’t know how much leeway you have with choosing materials – but sift through the dross and find the good, true, and beautiful presenting it to your students at every opportunity. Assign classics when you can, quote from them when you can’t assign them, and make sure they know from what source the quote or reference came from. They will seek out the authors and works you cite without you instructing them to. In fact, “discovering” Lewis, L’Engle, Bronte, Dickens, or Tolkien on there own is one of the great joys of being a student, especially at this stage.

      When presenting a grammar lesson, for example, use quotes and excerpts from classic literature, USA founding documents, letters (I especially like the letters of John and Abigail Adams), classic fairytales (most are analogies of the Gospel, or are “whole stories” where good is good and evil is evil). I recently attended a seminar on “Fairy Tales and the Moral Imagination” – there are four types of stories:whole, healing, broken, and twisted. Focus on recommending and quoting from whole and healing stories (both of which portray good as good and evil as evil). In whole stories good wins, usually through some divine intervention – think Hansel and Gretel or Sleeping Beauty. In “healing stories” there is still no moral ambiguity, but good wins in a way not expected – Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Little Mermaid” NOT THE DISNEY DRIVEL, is a perfect example. If you can’t assign them, reference them. Avoid broken or twisted stories that present good as bad and bad as good. Use analogies, logic puzzles, and syllogisms whenever possible – this exercises their ability to perceive truth when given perplexing information – this is why these things are rarely taught anymore and even have been removed from standardized testing, including the SAT.

      Point out the order in nature whenever possible – the cyclical nature of the seasons, the stars, the tides, the structures of a leaf, the natural relationships within animal communities – troops, packs, flocks, mated pairs so that your students can see that there is an order to our world and that everything has a “nature” – since you can’t tell them that there really is Truth that is not subjective, show them at every opportunity. Create a culture of truth, goodness, and beauty in your classroom and overwhelm them with these things as much as you are able. If presented regularly with the true, good, and beautiful, those things that do not fit into those categories will become obviously false. In order for something to “ring true” to your students, they will have had to have heard a bell ring – so ring it.

      I am sorry for the wall of text. I cannot do what you do – go into the trenches so to speak – and you have been teaching longer than I have. Sometimes a fresh perspective can energize us for the last leg of a difficult journey, so I hope something I wrote is helpful. So again, bless you.

      • Jeremy L

        I’ve never laughed so hard in my life. Andersen wrote “The Little Mermaid” because he fell in love with a man. It is an allegory. The mermaid falls in love with someone she isn’t supposed to fall in love with. She doesn’t have a voice to communicate her love (as society often stifles one’s ability to be open about their homosexuality). The story represents his heartbreak. You wouldn’t know about that because you think gays only feel infatuation. Sorry I ruined your little lesson plan, but I suppose you have no choice but to ban children from reading “The Little Mermaid.” How wonderful.

        • allie B

          Because she denies her base desires for the prince – who is not an appropriate partner for her – and does not kill the prince at her sisters’ insistence. If the sun rose on the day the prince was married to another, the mermaid would have become foam on the sea rather than live out her 300 year life-span. Mermaids did not have immortal souls and unless they were joined to a mortal in sacramental marriage, at which time they would become one and therefore allowing her to share in her beloved’s soul. Because, however, she resisted the temptation to save her own life, she was granted an immortal soul . Have you actually read “The Little Mermaid”? It is about sacrificing one’s self for another, not about sex or sexuality.

          Whether Andersen experienced same-sex attraction is irrelevant. His letters show that he had strong emotional and romantic attachments to both men and women, (he proposed unsuccessfully to several women, including famous opera singer Jenny Lind) and that he decided to live a celibate life. From all accounts he was never sexually involved with anyone.

          It is only in modern times, in which everything is viewed through the distorting lens of sex and sexuality, that it has been suggested that “The Little Mermaid” is a story of anything other than self-sacrifice.

          • Jeremy L

            I don’t doubt it’s about self-sacrifice. The mermaid very much was in love with the prince, willing to sacrifice herself for him. A gay person can do the same for his partner. Why must the story being an allegory for Andersen’s romantic love for a man make it about sex? Why sexuality magically enhances male/female relationships to levels of divine glory but destroys and soils same sex relationships to the point where no real love can exist whatsoever has yet to make much sense. Your interpretation of Andersen as choosing celibacy is interesting. Although it isn’t impossible that he simply was afraid about expressing his sexuality because being different caused him much grief, as “The Ugly Duckling” suggests. Poor guy was starved of intimacy, but you wouldn’t know about that because you get to be “holy” and express your sexuality at the same time. At any rate, why would you give a child something to read written by someone who had same-sex attraction? Those with same-sex attraction invariably have pedophilic tendencies, do they not? Andersen was probably trying to lure children in with his fairy tales, now wasn’t he? I wouldn’t take the homosexual subtext in “The Little Mermaid” lightly for the children’s sake.

          • allie B

            Oh, wow. You really don’t have a clear picture of who Andersen was or the times he lived in. Andersen was a deeply religious man. His writing reflects his relationship with Christ and religion as well as his relationship with the changing times – he wrote in the time between Romanticism and Realism. His passions were bound by human nature and a love for the natural world out of which grew his deep desire to see God. “The Little Mermaid” ,”The Last Dream of the Old Oak Tree”, “The Little Match Girl” among other tales are about this very thing. How do I know this? Because he himself wrote about it in letters and other books. In fact, the bulk of his writing is about God and faith – times of great religious fervor, and times of dryness.

            It has only been in very recent times – the past two or three decades – that the fullness of humanity has been superseded by fragmented and distorted sexuality. It is telling that you seem to be able only to see anything – art, love, literature, religion, humanity – through the filter of sexuality, and a disordered sexuality at that. We have several generations of people, the majority of which are ruled by the stomach, not the chest. We have replaced virtues with base passions, beauty with anti-beauty, and eternity with instant gratification. We have created an emotionally and philosophically crippled people who have been navel gazing for so long they have lost the ability to lift their head and look up. It is precisely this narrow and distorted view we are attempting to avoid in educating our own children. The focus on LGBT+ ideology in our schools is only a part of what is wrong with modern progressive education. It is one of the building blocks of moral relativism, and a tool for denial of the existence of truth.

            Andersen and most of his generation would find the modern obsession with sexuality and the public celebration of vice and disordered passions appalling, but even more so childish, vulgar, and ridiculous. Your “subtext” is an invention of modern times. If a young person suffering with same-sex attraction can identify with the mermaid, so can anyone suffering from any type of concupiscence. The message, regardless, is that one puts aside disordered passions, base desires, sinfulness, and self interest and – though difficult and painful – Heaven is the reward for our suffering.

            Also, if you have actually read the story, you might notice that the entire time the mermaid was pursuing her disordered passion, she suffered: she felt that with every step she was walking on knives. Her pain did not come from the judgement of others, but from her desire to be something that was not in her nature to be. She was a mermaid, regardless of her human legs. It was painful for her to use them, and she still had no immortal soul. She may have looked human, but was not. It was a painful pretend. By no act of will, no trickery, no glamour, was she granted an immortal soul, but by divine intervention as a reward for her rejection of her base desires in favor of virtue and self-sacrifice.

            Your analysis of Andersen’s writings is sophomoric and tainted with an agenda that he simply did not share and that did not even exist at the time he lived. Your insistence in superimposing modern ideas on classic works is ridiculous. It is a common theme among those in the LGBT+ movement, this kind of cultural appropriation and revisionist history.

            If you absolutely MUST analyze this tale through a modern lens – and one of homosexuality at that- the result is not what you had hoped at all. The mermaid was not “born that way” but chose to give up the physical attributes of a mermaid in order to pass for human and convince a human to fall in love with her and marry her. Even if she succeeded, she would have done that through duplicity, the prince would have no idea she was not human, so a sacramental marriage was not even possible as he could not properly consent (a fact that the sea witch knew well – she never intended for the mermaid to find any kind of happiness). Her choice had painful and sorrowful consequences for her, resulting in her inevitable death. It was only her selflessness in refusing to kill the prince to save her own life (which was endangered due to her own choices to follow a disordered passion)for which she was given – through extraordinary and supernatural means – an immortal soul and the opportunity to prepare that soul for Heaven. Not only did her choice to follow her disordered passions, her deception in her attempt to attain what she desired though it was against nature, and her resorting to consulting an evil witch for help have dire consequences (cut out her tongue, not just take her voice – and to reject the natural gift she had been given in exchange for the opportunity to purse something she desired that was not meant for her), but it was through her embracing of the consequences for her actions and taking responsibility for her foolish, base, and selfish choices in the end that allowed her to be redeemed. It really isn’t the modern gay anthem you had hoped for, quite the opposite.

            I won’t even bother to respond to the weird little temper tantrum you threw at the end of your comment…

          • Jeremy L

            Why do you think gay rights are an obsession with sexuality and a public celebration of vice? Though sex may be a component of a same-sex relationship, it is not what every single gay couple’s relationship revolves around. You seem to concede that gay couples can be in love with one another, but insist that it is not “real” love. And yet straight couples can have sex and still be “really” in love (if they are married, I suppose you say; before eating cake and putting on a ring, you are nothing but lustful, apparently). Your message that romantic love is little more than lust (if that is what you insist, just trying to get it right) and that sexuality is not ultimately an expression of love or meant for interpersonal bonding, but rather a means to produce children and nothing more would not bode well with many heterosexuals both today and in times gone by. Are heterosexuals who think marriage is not entirely for having sex in order to have kids sex-obsessed? Falling in love and wanting to be with the person you love is not sex obsession. Many heterosexuals who cannot consummate a marriage let alone have kids still get married, with no fuss, no objections. Is a man paralyzed from the waist down not selfish and not really in love when he marries a woman? Or is it “different” when they’re heterosexual?

            In your firm decision that homosexual love is lust and silly infatuation that could never go any deeper than the love achieved by heterosexuality, you believe that Andersen simply had a little crush on some guy and wrote “Mermaid” to talk about how virtuous he is to forget this silly little crush. You don’t consider that he was deeply in love with a man with as real a love as any man could possess for a woman. You don’t think the mermaid’s feeling of stepping on knives is reflective of the pain Andersen felt at trying so hard to be close to someone while knowing his feelings could never be reciprocated. You fail to see Andersen’s heartbreak because you can’t think of homosexual love as anything but stupid, silly crushes people can get over just like that with a little religion (whether you think homosexuals can enter into heterosexual marriages and lose same-sex attraction has yet to be seen; I don’t know if you think a heterosexual union between people who aren’t in love is somehow “real love” either). The ending may very well be Andersen trying to feel better about his situation with the idea of “Well. I’ll at least go to heaven if I’m a virgin.” It just is so sad that he never knew partnership. Not sad that he never had sex, but sad that he could only view his feelings for another man as vice. Sad that he suppressed his love out of fear. Sad that he went through life alone while so many others married easily. Sad many of them married just out of custom or, yes, out of lust, while he held his deep love in his heart, unable to let it out except in allegorical writing, because he just happened to love a man. But everyone thought that was ridiculous and impossible. I see Andersen as tragic. Ever read “The Snowman”? You’ll see more of what I mean. Andersen knew his homosexual love was not cheap. He was not happily throwing it away, but dwelling with sadness on the fact that it could never be realized (and I don’t necessarily mean with sex!). It was only others who would have called such love cheap and all about sex, as you do now.

            I thought you believed same-sex attraction increased the chances of the person afflicted being a pedophile. Does the link not exist with Andersen because you happen to like him?

          • Andrew Mason

            What else can you think other than a celebration of Sodom and Gomorrah? Platonic relationships – bloodbrothers etc are fine, but when you cross that line you have trouble. Sex an expression of love? So prostitutes are the most loved profession in the world? Yes it creates an interpersonal bond, but that may or may not be a good thing. So you accept that paedophilia isn’t a sexual thing? They simply want to be with the one they love?

            Anderson deeply in love with another guy? You do know he was celibate right? And that he never acted on his desire for various women?

          • Jeremy L

            “Platonic relationships – bloodbrothers etc are fine” Why does sexuality enhance opposite-sex love but destroy same-sex love?

            “Sex an expression of love?” Yes, between monogamous couples. Never did I say promiscuity equaled love.

            “So you accept pedophilia isn’t a sexual thing.” It is. You cannot form a relationship with a child. You cannot form love with someone who is not on your same mental level.

            “Anderson deeply in love with another guy? You do know he was celibate right? And that he never acted on his desire for various women.” Um. Yes. I know all of that. Ever heard of being bisexual? Every heard of falling in love while a virgin?

          • Andrew Mason

            I’m not aware of a cross-gender equivalent to bloodbrothers. Feel free to enlighten me if you’re aware of something, but if such relationships exist they aren’t enhanced by sexual relations. Oh as for enhancing marriage, destroying same sex ‘love’, probably comes down to the purpose of sex.

            Of course you can love someone whose mental level is radically different to your own. What rock have you been living under? Historically women were considered less intelligent, and even today relationships with significant differences exist. Note too that in ancient Greek society a relationship between a man and a boy was seen as a highly favorable situation, and while he’s not exactly a positive example, the Roman emperor Nero went so far as to actually marry a boy. I don’t recall whether there was any legal weight to the ceremony, though of course being emperor would suggest the pederatic marriage was at least tolerated.

            Ever hear of sin? History suggests that whether by choice or circumstance Anderson never acted on any of any of the desires attributed to him.

          • Jeremy L

            People who are gay are not and never will be attracted to the opposite sex. They only want to date the same sex. Not letting them date because it makes you upset (ahem, I mean because of “sin”) is irrational. They are not doing anything to anyone. It would be inappropriate for them to date and marry people they were not attracted to and did not love. As such, sexuality may enhance the friendship of two gay people if they decided to date.

            Women are still adults. Even if they were seen as less intelligence, they did not have the highly limited mental capacity of a still-developing child who doesn’t understand sex, consent, romance, or anything of the sort. There is no emotional bonding over romance and intimacy when one party does not grasp those concepts. I do not know if Nero sincerely loved that boy he married, but if the boy was very young, he could not have loved him in return. And I doubt Nero would actually love the boy at all if he didn’t care that he and the boy could not form a deep relationship since the boy would not have the proper mental capacity to understand sex, consent, romance, etc.

            So what if Andersen never acted on his desires? That doesn’t mean he didn’t fall in love with a man. Falling in love does not necessitate you have sex first. Did you think “bisexual” was a suggestion that he did act on his desires? You people are weird with distinctions in terminology. Okay. Andersen had both opposite sex and same sex attractions and didn’t act on either. This was not necessarily because he was trying to not “sin”, but because the man he loved did not reciprocate and he was nervous around women.

          • Andrew Mason

            Except you have all those ex-gays running around which suggests things aren’t so cut and dried as you make out. People can change, and they don’t have to act on their desires.

            Who says children don’t understand sex, consent, romance or anything of that nature? As previously mentioned ancient Greek society saw man-boy relationships as a healthy, beneficial part of a child’s development into manhood. So you’re rejecting the notion of love being a one way act? What of unrequited love? Or the medieval type concept of a knight chastely loving a married woman from afar?

            Actually I think Christians need to be more black and white with their terminology. Perhaps start with rejecting the concept of bisexual, zoophile etc and just identify it as sexual deviancy due to a sinful nature.

          • Jeremy L

            The “ex gays” are either 1. Lying and suppressing their sexuality to find acceptance. 2. Attracted to both sexes and suppressing one side of their sexuality to find acceptance. Or 3. Never gay to begin with and only thought they were gay because they were stupid. No, people cannot change. They can lie, hide, and misinterpret themselves, but cannot change, not by deliberate effort. Am I against one way love? Yes. If it amounts to rape. We have age of consent for a reason. If you have sex too young, you can come away emotionally damaged. Honestly the whole “If you support gay rights, you must support pedophilia” thing is getting old.

          • Andrew Mason

            Of course people can change, they change all the time. Why would you assume sexuality is uniquely different?

            One way love is not rape. Why would you say something so offensive?

            It’s simply a matter of logic. Homosexuality is not marriage and can never be marriage regardless of what the government decrees. If you open the door to it then there is no reason to oppose other forms of government approved marriage.

          • Jeremy L

            Could you change your sexuality if you wanted to? Some things are deeply rooted within us. Try your best to be aroused by a guy and you’ll see what I mean.

            If you are in love with a dog or a child from afar and do not act on it, great. If you are in love with a fellow adult human, you may try to seek their love in return.

            Marriage is and always has been what we make it, in spite of beliefs that it is of divine origin and has always had one definition. Because gays are actively part of many societies and because they are consenting adults, the government has good reason to endorse ssm. We do not now nor will we ever have an interest in endorsing child marriage or polygamy, even if it were decreed that pedophilia and a polygamous drive are innate (although the latter is an absurd proposition). It is needless to complicate the two-partner system because someone wants sex from a bunch or women, and children cannot give consent.

          • Andrew Mason

            An interesting question. The problem is I don’t need to so long as my sexuality accords with Scripture.

            False. If the human you are in love with is ineligible then acting on that is no better than acting on your love for an animal.

            Again false. Marriage is an institution created by God. Yes societies tinker with the concept – the format of the wedding ceremony etc but it has a generally consistent meaning across time and cultures. The government has no reason to endorse SSM. Yes homosexuals are part of society, so are (would be) polygamists and paedophiles. Not sure how you can claim that a polygamous drive being innate is absurd. It is still practiced in some cultures even today. Voiding the number limit is no more complicated than permitting any other class of unlawful relationship. As for children being unable to give consent, that’s a matter of perspective. Those who advocate for the practice argue children can. Certainly those who are molested at a young age tend to be sexually aware.

          • Jeremy L

            “I would, but I don’t need to” is a convenient excuse. The reality is you can’t change it, as gays can’t change theirs.

            People have different ideas of who is “eligible” to be pursued. The thing is the idea that someone’s spouse is ineligible is based on sound rationale while someone of the same sex being ineligible is based on opinion.

            Your belief that God created marriage is yours to have, but no one knows if it is true and it should not influence the law. Exactly what do we get from endorsing child marriage and polygamy? Hurt children and jealous homes with a lot of legal confusion as to who is entitled to what. And it is absurd to insist that there is an innate “polygamous orientation”. Numbers are not the same as gender. No one MUST sleep with a bunch of people.

            Those who think children can give consent are wrong. A kid does not know what emotional consequences he or she is getting into by agreeing to have sex with someone much older

          • allie B

            I am not responding to a parcel of non-sequiturs and references to things I did not write, or distortions of things I did. You want to discuss literature; literary types, tropes, and motifs; or biographical information about literary figures, sure thing.

            The relationship that most greatly impacted Andersen and his writing was his rejected love of Riborg Voigt whom he loved as a young man and desperately wanted to share his life with. Though he pursued women (his greatest expressed desire was for a wife and married life – per his own diaries), and had written letters of romantic expression to Edvard Collin as well as diary entries about infatuations (his own description of his feelings, not mine)with men, Riborg Voigt remained the person he loved until his death. though she married another man. Riborg Voigt was a woman, not a man. The unrequited love that made Andersen a tragic figure was love for a woman. If you actually want to know about Andersen and not your invention of Andersen, his letters and diaries are readily available as are biographies about him.

            Anya Aarenstrup, an expert on Andersen’s life and literature wrote in her biography of Andersen: ” It is correct to point to the very ambivalent elements in Andersen’s emotional life concerning the sexual sphere, but it is decidedly just as wrong to describe him as homosexual and maintain that he had physical relationships with men. He did not. Indeed that would have been entirely contrary to his moral and religious ideas.” Note that she does not say the moral and religious ideas of the time, but HIS moral and religious ideas. One cannot determine the motives of another based on one’s own moral or religious ideas.

            You are free to “see Andersen” any way you wish. You are free to create an entire narrative of his life based on your feelings. You are free interpret his literature based on modern ideology. You are also free to be wrong, which you are in this case.

            If you want to have a conversation about the prevalence and acceptance of pederasty and pedophilia within the gay community – we have already had that conversation, just go back and re-read it. Maybe then you will see what I actually wrote and what you have invented – kind of like the biography of Andersen and interpretation of his literature that you have invented. If you want to have a conversation about obsession with sex and sexuality to the neglect of all other things, look to your own writings in this and other threads.

            I am sure that you and I will meet again, as you seem to enjoy following me from thread to thread, gleefully misinterpreting what I say and wrongly guessing what I think, feel, believe, and intend.

          • Jeremy L

            I was tempted to comment because I thought it ironic that you referenced Andersen as a good influence considering his sexuality. I thought you didn’t know about his sexuality, but you are an expert on it. I apologize. I can’t say I obsess over sex to the detriment of everything else considering I want people to marry and be together for love, not sex. How needless it was that Andersen felt guilt over being bisexual. How sad it was he was never together with the woman he loved. How not sad that he never had sex. It was that he was alone that makes me sad. You are free to believe that no homosexual relationship is about deep love, and you’re free to be wrong about that.

          • allie B

            I am not an expert on anything. I happen to love literature in general and fairy tales in particular. I know a good deal about Andersen because he is a distant cousin, and so have been an avid reader of his writings since early childhood. I used him as an example because some of his writings are perfect examples of “healing stories” as opposed to “whole”, “broken”, or “twisted” stories. In a “healing story” good is always good, bad is always bad, and good does win, just not in the manner expected and often after suffering consequences from disordered choices. Andersen’s sexual ambiguity is completely irrelevant.

            It is not actually recorded anywhere that Andersen felt guilt over his infatuations (again, his words) with men. It is not even certain that he was bisexual – only seeking intimacy with others. It is recorded that he was deeply religious and that his writings are filled with religious motifs. It is also documented that the woman he truly loved married another and he sought to replace her in his heart with no success. It is very sad that he was lonesome and his great desire – to be married and to have a family – was never realized. This desire s recorded in his own diaries.

            I have no doubt that relationships between people of the same sex are based in very deep, very real, love. Friendship is the highest form of love.
            The issue is that we have sexualized every type of relationship – there are actually people out there who relate a nursing mother to a pedophile, for an out there example. Romantic relationships are not the pinnacle of human relations – marriages fail when Eros is the only kind of love partners have for each other. When relationships between people who are not appropriate romantic partners become romantic, they become disordered. The desire to mimic marriage – the union of a man and woman with the purpose of forming a family and being open to the creation of life – is a sign of that disorder and of the desire to be a part of a rightly ordered relationship.

            I really don’t mind if you comment on things I write, regardless of what thread it is in. I do wish you wouldn’t extrapolate or attempt to deduce what you think I mean, or what you think I must believe.

          • Jeremy L

            I apologize for my ignorance on Andersen. I will admit that I was going off of things I’ve heard about the meaning of “The Little Mermaid.” I knew about Edvard Collin. Riborg Voigt I never heard of. I will go to read more about Andersen.

            I agree that friendship is the highest form of love. But I also think that romantic partnerships constitute friendship. The two are not mutually exclusive. And having sex with someone does not negate this friendship and love.

            I’m afraid I don’t agree with the idea that we are sexualizing every type of relationship. Gay relationships exist for the same reason as straight ones. Some people, as I’m sure you know, find that they are attracted to only the same sex. And, as I’m sure you also know, most people want to have a partner. Yes, that means they want to share their sexuality with someone else. But it also means a lot more. For someone who is attracted to exclusively the same sex and who would like to date and marry (like most people), then the only people they will be compatible to do these things with will be with people of the same sex.

            Your side argues they should settle for platonic relationships and be celibate, right? Well, that is where we disagree and will always disagree. I’m not saying they NEED to have sex anymore than anyone else NEEDS to have sex, I’m just saying that it can be exceedingly difficult to live life alone. No one to come home to. No one whose support you depend on more than all other’s. No one to share their life with. You can have good friends. Friends who stick with you till the end. But those friends will always have to limit their time with you to spend time with their partners, that thing you don’t have. Those friends will never want to get closer to you than is socially acceptable for a platonic friendship. Touch and close physical intimacy are important, and the “just friends” in your life just can’t give you those things, at least not to a sufficient level.

            Look, I know homosexual acts can be risky. But the stigma on them I just find so hypocritical because so many heterosexuals do the same acts without anyone getting outraged. Yes, perhaps such acts may be seen as “gross,” but virtually all sex is a rather “gross” affair. But I was never focused on that aspect. All I ever saw was too many friends getting their hearts broken and too many people not understanding them or their feelings. Too many people hurting them in ways both psychological and physical. I live in the deep South. It can sometimes be a nightmare for them here.

            I know there is a problem with promiscuity in the gay community. I wish for this problem to end. I know there are gay sexual predators and gay child molesters. And they are just as evil as their straight counterparts. But within the world of homosexuality, there really are the sorts of relationships we see in heterosexual marriages also. And I think those relationships are merited and can benefit the people in them greatly. Sex or no sex.

            I am sorry for misinterpreting your beliefs, and I hope I have cleared up some of mine. But I am afraid we will never agree on how someone should respond to being attracted to exclusively the same sex. I’m sorry for being over emotional. I do not want to be a mean, spiteful person and I’m afraid, in my trying to defend people I care about, I can become angry. I hope you can forgive me. But I’m afraid I don’t think any further conversation is productive since we will never agree.

          • allie B

            I appreciate your candor. There are many different ways to live in community other than through romantic relationships. We all have an innate desire to know and to be known, without a doubt. You might want to do some reading about St. Francis and St. Clare, or Therese and Maurice. Both are examples of deeply loving and intimate relationships -more so than most marriages I know – that transcend the physical. I know that my views are highly unpopular in modern society, but they are rooted in truth, study, and personal experience.

            I don’t know you, obviously, but I get the impression that you are young, or young at heart. You seem to be very sincere. Not so very long ago, I would have sounded an awful lot like you and would never imagined that I would have come to the conclusions about many issues that I have come to over time.

            I do not have to forgive you for having a different opinion than I do. A good argument is not a the same as a quarrel.

      • Debbie Hester

        Allie, thank-you for your wonderful suggestions. I do believe that people who are outside of the situation can offer in-biased and new perspectives to the issue.
        I appreciate your time you took in responding to my concerns.
        Take care and may God bless your endeavors to His glory.

      • Dominic Lombardo

        I assume that the “Lewis” to whom you are referring is C.S. Lewis and not Sinclair Lewis. The time at which reading “Elmer Gantry” and “It Can’t Happen Here” and “Babbitt” and “Arrowsmith” and “Main Street” would be age-appropriate will come in late high school, but certainly not in grade school or junior-high.

        • allie B

          Yes! Thank you for clarifying. I am actually reading Babbit for the first time with my friend’s daughter, a senior in High School. I have only read some of Sinclair Lewis’s short stories – a gap in my own education, perhaps.

          A funny thing about age-appropriateness: My youngest son, who is seven but a very advanced reader, came out of my bedroom asking “Who is O’Connor?” I have a collection of Flannery O’Connor’s short stories that I enjoy, and often refer to. So, I told him that she was a great American author who wrote short stories, but they were for adults. He then proceeded to ask me “What’s a View of the Woods?” I felt the blood drain from my face as I asked him, “You didn’t read ‘A View of the Woods’, did you?” He told me he started to but then thought maybe he shouldn’t. “Oh, good!” I said, “you can’t read Flannery O’Conner for a long while yet.” He replied, “Oh! I CAN read Flannery O’Conner, but I ought not to.” Little stinker.

          So anyway, yes, Clive Staples, not Sinclair.

    • Jeremy L

      Fellow Georgian here. Glad to know we both are averse to Islam. However, “Welcoming Schools” seems to me like a wonderful curriculum teaching children not to hate gay/trans people and combat gender stereotypes.

  • Dave

    You just had to make me click on that link! Thanks Dr. Brown, I will have nightmares for the rest of my life! Lol

  • Dant e

    I`ve had a few discussions with my 11yr old nieces about the alphabet cults over the last few yrs and the wrongs of what they`re doing and thinking with themselves. My nieces have been well and truly indoctrinated with the propaganda spouted by the education system, media and worse, their mother(my sister) whom herself has been indoctrinated with fairness and equality and acceptance through her 32 yrs of English life by the education system and media. The most common line is they`re doing nothing wrong if they love one another and aren`t harming anyone else, this is the one we hear and see all the time by the cult followers and is not the thoughts of a young girl who would not be thinking of such things but for the brainwashing. One of the nieces(twins) was more convinced by my arguments than the other and stuck to her line of its not wrong if they love each other. I learned that their father had advised them not to listen to anyone trying to convince them of religious beliefs until they`re old enough to weigh the arguments for and against, yet he allows them to be indoctrinated with all these other harmful, deviant beliefs.

  • Jason Todd

    I have said and will continue to say homosexuals are not and never have been “born that way.” If that were true, there would be no need whatsoever to go after children. The fact they are speaks for itself.

    • John Connor

      Your saying it over and over doesn’t make it the truth…..

      • Jason Todd

        Correct. I really only need to say it once. Because it has never been false.

        • John Connor

          Prove it….

          • Jason Todd

            It already has been proven, many times over, including at ChristianNews(dot)net, which you also post at.

            Don’t play games with me. I have zero tolerance for other people’s bullfeces.

          • John Connor

            I don’t care what you have tolerance for. I am calling him a liar. You are a faceless poster on a forum…..nothing more. If you don’t like what I have to say or are too cowardly to address it….block me like you do everyone else.

          • Jason Todd

            So you are calling Dr. Brown a liar why? Can you actually dispute anything he said? Because you haven’t done that yet.

            And while you’re at it, feel free to explain:

            Heather Has Two Mommies, King & King, etc. GLSEN. Fistgate. Queer Kids Stuff.

            I’m waiting.

          • John Connor

            Keep waiting mr wizard. I owe you nothing

          • Jason Todd

            Because you have nothing. You are defending something without even knowing why.

            Are you so open minded your brain fell out? Or are you just trolling?

          • John Connor

            I don’t respond on your demand. There is nothing that points to gays recruiting or coming after your kids like the boogeyman. In 20 years of treating pediatric patients, the only abuse I have ever seen came from heterosexuals. Period. I have sent more kids to donate their organs due to what happened at the hands of heterosexuals than I care to remember. This is a ridiculous narrative pushed by the religious in order to demonize gays. With regard to the books you mentioned, they are nothing more than mirrors of our society. NEWSFLASH!!!! there are gays in our midst. There’s nothing wrong with letting children know that there are different types of people out there. My daughters have read a couple of those books. Big Deal. I teach my kids to tolerance for people from all walks of life. My girls have both straight and gay friends as do me and my wife.

          • Gary

            Being tolerant of Christians while endorsing homosexuals does not work. You have chosen to side with homosexuals and reject Christians.

          • John Connor

            I’ve rejected nothing more than the outright lies you push. My family is entirely Christian with the exception of me and my two children.

          • Gary

            I disagree. Christianity is anti-homosexual, and homosexuality is anti-Christian. Everyone must choose sides, and you have chosen the homosexuals.

          • John Connor

            Opinions vary….

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Even the case what evidence for someone being born that way may I ask ?

          • Jason Todd

            You know, defending lies with more lies is generally not a good idea. And compounding that by indulging in a fantasy you’re in the medical profession is just bizarre.

            You really should have quit while you were behind.

          • John Connor

            Shows how much you really don’t know. Where have I lied?? Been in medicine since 1997, prove me wrong. Oh wait, you can’t. I work for the second largest children’s hospital in the US. Prove me wrong. The uneducated, such as yourself, make me laugh with comments like yours.

          • Jason Todd

            Anyone could say that. Post your real name and the name of the hospital. We can call and verify.

            Anyone who says they have never been witness to abuse of a child by a homosexual is a liar. Period.

          • John Connor

            It is my real name. Liar??? LOL! Prove me wrong. You’ve got nothing but pure uneducated opinion. I have 20 years of experience to back me up. Period.

          • Jason Todd

            Liar. The fact you won’t name the hospital you allegedly work at so it can be called for verification proves it.

          • John Connor

            I’m not big on giving my personal info out to anyone on a forum. I don’t care what you think about me. Period. The fact that you think I would even consider giving you any personal info makes me laugh out loud!

          • Jason Todd

            You have been patently dishonest about everything you have said so far:

            Homosexuals are born that way.
            Homosexuals aren’t going after children.
            Homosexuals don’t abuse children.
            There’s no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia.

            Every single thing listed above is an absolute, bald-faced lie. And every one of those things came from you.

            Why should anyone believe anything you say, when you have lied no less than four times?

            There’s something wrong with you, sir.

          • John Connor

            I don’t care if you believe me or not mr wizard. Show me the proof that they’re not born that way. Show me the connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. Prove that they’re out to get our kids…laughing…. Prove that they abuse kids any more so than heterosexuals do.

            You have nothing but conjecture, personal opinion, and some sick agenda against the gay community.

            There’s definitely something wrong with you sir.

          • Jason Todd

            Dude, stop. You aren’t winning any points by assuming moral superiority when you refuse to acknowledge what everyone else knows.

            You have lost the argument and will continue to as long as you insist on being intentionally dishonest.

          • John Connor

            Haven’t been dishonest even once o’ cowardly one.

          • Seamrog

            Your kids should be taken away from you.

          • John Connor

            Come get em big boy!!!

          • Seamrog

            Listen, Tinkerbell. I’d do it in a heartbeat.

            Children deserve better than pathetic people like you.

            In a saner world, liars like you would be set out in the cold, and your children would be properly cared for.

          • John Connor

            You know absolutely nothing about me, sweetie. My kids are straight a students and wonderful people unlike yourself. You’re a joke at best.

          • Oremus

            “…sent more kids to donate their organs…” Shame on you. The person has to be ALIVE in order to donate organs; the “scientists” have to finish them off: i.e., kill them. A donor can give something that he has two of: i.e., an eye or a kidney. Anything else causes the victim-donor to be murdered.

          • John Connor

            Those were children who were brain dead. No, they do not have to be alive to donate organs. Donation after cardiac death is done all of the time in hospital.

          • Oremus

            “Brain dead” is a construct of ghoulish “scientists” in order to further their practice of organ “donations.” Research online for your edification, what Paul Byrne, M.D. says about the matter. The “donor” is finished off, in order to get his organs. It is big business.

          • John Connor

            Not the sharpest….. I don’t care what he has to say. I work in the field of pediatric intensive care medicine. You literally have no idea.

          • Oremus

            “Not the sharpest….” He is an AUTHORITY on the matter. YOU literally have no idea!

          • John Connor

            He is not. He is a neonatologist and biased from the standpoint of Catholicism. I can introduce you to many pediatric neurologists who vehemently disagree with his nonsense. I have seen a multitude of brain death studies performed. Including cold calories, ventilator apnea tests, and nuclear brain perfusion studies. I work in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit as an Intensivist. You are the one who is misguided and horribly uninformed. Care to explain any of the studies I noted?

          • Oremus

            In your sphere, your colleagues are eager to “perform” transplants, and ignore the ghoulish sources of the organs. Over and out: don’t bother me with your comments again.

          • John Connor

            Nobody is eager to harvest organs, especially from children. You just don’t know what you don’t know.

          • Oremus

            I know ignorance when I see it, or read it. I repeat: OVER AND OUT. Don’t bother me or anyone else with your fake science.

          • John Connor

            Nothing fake about it. You posted some nonsense from a biased source who isn’t even a neurologist..experts on the brain and nervous system…and expect it to hold water. Prove me wrong! Tell me what you know about the testing procedures I posted….oh wait, you can’t. Do yourself a favor and do some research for yourself.

          • Oremus

            Well, duh. It doesn’t take a neurologist in order to know that if a person’s heart is beating, the person is ALIVE. And “alive” is when they take out the heart. Imagine yourself in the throes of death (painful enough), and a “scientist” is cutting into your body in order to get your heart. Remember, “brain dead” is a construct of ghouls. Organ transplants are big bu$ine$$.

          • John Connor

            Not at all. Stop with your conspiracy theories.

          • Oremus

            You are the conspiracy theorist, buster. And you are so tiresome as to cause a reader nausea.

          • John Connor

            Nope. I work in Pediatrics and know what I’m talking about. Zofran works well for nausea

      • Dena

        Science and common sense show that the “born this way” is a false narrative. There are even scientific journals that have published that it’s false, harmful and destructive.

        • John Connor

          Nothing proves the false narrative you mention. Citations for your accusations?

          • Dena

            Sure. Look at the Scientific Journal the New Atlantis: Sexuality and Gender, Findings from the Biological, Psychological and Social Sciences.

        • Jason Todd

          Dena, John knows homosexuals are not born that way.

          What’s funny is now pedophiles are saying the same thing. And homosexual activists are conspicuously silent.

          The mind boggles….

          • John Connor

            Nonsense

          • Jason Todd

            Liar.

          • John Connor

            Prove it. Oh wait, you can’t.

          • Jason Todd

            Name a single homosexual that has disputed a pedophile saying they were born that way.

            Oh, wait: You can’t.

          • John Connor

            Stay on topic sweetheart. Homosexuality has absolutely zero to do with pedophilia. Next???

          • Jason Todd

            NAMBLA makes you a liar.

          • John Connor

            NAMBLA ??? ROTFLMAO!!! If that’s the best you can do, I laugh in your general direction.

      • Seamrog

        Neither do the incessant claims otherwise.

        Men are naturally inclined to women, and vice versa.

        All else is disordered aberration.

        • John Connor

          Not at all. People don’t just decide to be homosexual

          • Seamrog

            You are a disingenuous political hack.

            You cannot speak the truth because your heart is so hardened.

          • John Connor

            Where have I lied? This has nothing to do with politics mr wizard.

        • John Connor

          Nope it’s just a natural variant of human life. Why so much hate?

  • Patmos

    The level of selfishness displayed by many LGBT activists is through the roof. At this point you just have to call them what they are: A**holes.

    • Thisoldspouse

      We need to do more than call them out. We need to take real, effective, concrete action, involving blood if necessary. Who else wouldn’t shed blood to protect their children?

  • ImaginaryDomain

    You’re damn right they are.
    In their own words, central demands put forth by homosexual activists in their “1972 Gay Rights Platform”:

    • “Repeal all laws governing the age of sexual consent.”
    • “Repeal all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit.”

    • Jason Todd

      That thing is a manifesto, with every point on it pursued by the LGBTQW community.

      • Seamrog

        I have no idea why his comment was flagged. It is spot on.

        • John Connor

          How ridiculous

      • John Connor

        Nope. It’s a document whose origin can’t be verified. Nice conspiracy though.

  • Jarrfan

    Yes and unless the Christian community fights, they will have their way and we will be forced to accept it. They have now drag queens reading stories to little toddlers, they look just like over-sexed clowns. It is ridiculous. The rapture cometh soon!!!

    • JTLiuzza

      “The rapture cometh soon!!!”

      No such thing.

      • Jason Todd

        Oh? And how do you know?

      • eddiestardust

        And you would know , because?

        • Seamrog

          Because Jesus Christ warned us about those who prophesy about ‘the end.’

          It’s um, in the Bible.

  • Eric

    Dr Brown I have t 4 kids 14 year old ..6 year old .. 4 year old and 2 year old… What materials do you have that can help me prepare them …maybe I am articulating the question wrong but ..but I am speaking in regards to the article you wrote here and what resources you offer that can help me as aparent navigate this with my kids…. Blessinsg to you

    • Seamrog

      If you don’t know how to defend your own children against this crap, then they are in serious trouble, and it is your fault.

      How in the world can a father not know how to explain to his children about the basics of natural law and right and wrong?

      • Dant e

        Your comment is condemnatory and not helpful in the slightest, the poster was asking for help to do the right thing, all you would achieve with that comment is discouragement. In fact the agendas, rhetoric and indoctrinations are vast and difficult to deal with when the whole of society and medias are against you. Someone like DR. Brown has a wealth of experience, knowledge and responses to the alphabet cults arguments.

        • Seamrog

          I’m sorry, but he noted he has a 14 year old child. If he needs to ask for help for how he should prepare that child to defend itself against the culture of death, it is TOO LATE.

          It may discourage him, but it may also wake him the hell up.

          • Dant e

            He has already woken up, the reason he is reaching out for help with his question, this issue has snowballed especially in the last few years and much of it previously has been surreptitiously slipped in without parents knowledge with the first they know of it coming from their childs mouth. Regardless, no matter the age of the child it is never too late to change a childs mind with good arguments(the truth), where by himself it would be too late.

      • Eric

        We all sharpen and help each other I humbly understand I don’t know everything….why lash out rude and angry to me.? Why not be helpful? Blessings to you! Be Encouraged? Jesus is Lord!!!

        • Seamrog

          If you don’t know the basics of your own faith, and the natural law and cannot convey that to your children, it is your own fault.

          I don’t intend that to be ‘rude,’ and it certainly may seem that way, but what have you been doing for 14 years?

          The culture of death is rabidly serious, and as a father, you must be rabidly vigilant and protective, and it must become instinctual to you.

          • Eric

            We never quit growing in knowledge and wisdom …I will continue to stay humble open and teachable…this does not mean I have been a bad parent ..No in fact kids are God honoring…respectful.. intelligent..fun loving individuals….I am asking and expert on some of these social issues that have increased in our public schools for some insight…Just because I I ask for some one else’s insight and wisdom does not give you the right to lash out like you have..You do seem angry and disrespectfully attacking everyone on here. An see that plainly..you need to repent and apologize ..that would be the healthy thing to do..I forgive you ahead of time ..Praying for you to Blessings to you!

        • allie B

          Eric,

          Aside from providing and modeling a full and active life of faith for your children, there are some things you may not have thought of. If you are Catholic, go to reconciliation as a family once a month – so very powerful!

          Read together as a family. Most fairy tales in their original forms are reflections of scripture – good is always good, evil is always evil and must be destroyed – and good, through trials, suffering, and divine providence – always wins. Point out the natural order in nature. The world makes sense – show them that whenever possible. Show them examples of God’s plan for the family, and how beautiful that plan is. When confronted with something outside of that plan – those who suffer from and have succumbed to same-sex attraction for example- address it with compassion and love, but clearly that this is not what God has intended. Help them to understand that loving someone includes admonishing them when they are in error, not celebrating their sin.

          Have your children see YOU help someone in crisis pregnancy, refer a woman suffering after an abortion to an agency that will help them, read to those in hospice, take part in prison ministry – have them see you help those who are struggling, not just with basic physical needs, but spiritual needs. Do this not only because it is good to do, but because children know when we are being authentic. If you minister to those suffering from addiction – they will know the truth of your love when you speak to them about drugs, for example. If they see you acting out your faith in all manners, they will know you speak truth in all matters.

          Get all of your children serving others in age appropriate ways. Part of the reason why the “culture of death” has fascinated our society is that we have become so narcissistic. Serving others is a sure way to get out of one’s own head.

          At a recent class I attended, the speaker talked of his home as being under siege. Outside was green, vile, poison gas and his job was to seal up all the cracks so that it could not get in. The gas is modern “entertainment”, moral relativism, the media, etc. Truth, goodness, and beauty are the filters to use on your home, and in the gas-masks we send our children into the world with. Examine everything – if it cannot be put in the category of truth, goodness, or beauty than decide what place it really ought to have in your home and in the lives of your children.

          If you can pull them out of a public school system, or a corrupt private school – because there are many religious schools that are little more than the public school system with a prayer thrown in – do so. There are so many options out there.

          • Eric

            Good stuff Thank you

      • allie B

        This ideology is so insidious that parents need all the help we can get. Most children spend more waking hours in the school system than they do with their families – a system that continually tells them that their parents are fools and not to be trusted.

        • Seamrog

          I have to disagree with you here.

          If you are a person of faith, it is very simple. It is black and white.

          The reaction you may get is certainly not simple or easily handled, but if you are secure in your faith, then you are obligated to act accordingly.

          We know right from wrong, and as a parent you and I are given the responsibility from God to protect and defend them, and also to nurture and guide them.

          • allie B

            I think what Eric was looking for was practical help, not assistance in determining what his responsibilities are toward his children.

            Humans learn by imitation, and we imitate what we see and hear. We become what we behold. Children in a school setting are subjected to hours and hours of “beholding”. Families that find two incomes are necessary to get by are increasingly compelled to leave their children in someone else’s care, often in a government facility with government educators using government approved methods. Even families that have rejected the dual income/mass education model find that “modern culture” is continually scratching at our door. I believe what Eric is looking for, and what we all as parents of faith are looking for, are practical ways to navigate this world in which we must live and to help our children grow in wisdom and virtue in a world that tells them there is no such thing.

    • Dant e

      Keep trying to contact Dr. Bown Eric on his twitter/Facebook pages and radio shows etc for the info you require. God bless

      • Eric

        Thank you I sure will Blessings To You!

    • Thisoldspouse

      Take them out of the wicked government indoctrination centers, for starters.

      NO formal education at all is far better than what they are molded into in these institutions.

    • rg76

      Eric,
      Tom Gilson has a very helpful, well-laid out book titled, Critical Conversations: A Christian Parents Guide to Discussing Homosexuality with Teens, that I think you will find invaluable in thinking through and understanding the issues and then talking about them with your oldest child in a way that will also prepare/equip him or her in peer interactions. If you search his name on the Stand To Reason website, you can access the 9/14/16 podcast where he’s interviewed about the book and models the discussion with a teenager in such a sensitive and truthful manner that may also prove helpful to you.

      • Eric

        Awesome! Thank you

  • Starlord

    Do they go into Islamic schools and push this?

    • Jason Todd

      Are you kidding?

  • Dena

    Wow, yuck! I watched part of that video and it was horrifying. We need to stop being quiet and complacent and stand up against this.

  • Agincourt

    “For heaven’s sake, this is a school for Orthodox Jewish girls. Is nothing sacred anymore?”
    Jews should get their progressive agenda good and hard

    • Jason Todd

      Flagged for vulgar anti-semitic reference.

      • Agincourt

        Oh boo hoo.
        They don’t deserve an exemption from Cultural Marxism

        • Jason Todd

          Blocked.

          • Agincourt

            coward

  • J_CAS

    As an elementary public school teacher in Canada, I can tell you that the indoctrination is real, and it starts from kindergarten. All the teachers in my school, around the Day of Pink, read numerous books to the kids about the LGBTQ life, and the government expects us to embed all of this in normal, everyday lessons about math, social studies, etc. Take your kids out of public school, you have no idea what’s happening!

    • Seamrog

      Why would you continue to work in that environment?

      • J_CAS

        Because I am very close to retirement. This agenda in the schools is only very recent, and has snowballed in the last couple of years. It breaks my heart to see what is happening in the classrooms, but starting a new career after almost 30 years is not personally viable.

        • Seamrog

          Neither is partnering with it.

          Life on earth is short. Eternity is not.

          • J_CAS

            I do not partner with it. I assure you that I in no way take part in anything that goes on like that in other people’s classrooms. I have in fact been reprimanded by administration for refusing to do so. Please speak to what you know and don’t make assumptions.

          • Rusty

            I am very sympathetic to your situation. I too am within about 5 years of retirement and work in the Long Term Care industry. I have been vocal in opposition to euthanasia, and know it could ultimately cost me my job. I also know there are more “innovations” on the way, including a push by the gay lobby to make LTC homes “welcoming” to their lifestyles. When that happens (and it will likely include flying rainbow flags on behalf of the home), I will express my view that rainbow flags are an inappropriate political statement, and insist that if they fly that flag, they also put a crucifix next to it.

    • Thisoldspouse

      I commiserate with people like you who have invested entire lives in a career, as a conscientious Christian, only to find that the profession has been infiltrated by immoral deviants later on.

      • J_CAS

        For sure, it is stressful! Makes me hate my profession and I can’t wait to get out.

  • Andrew Mason

    The question is how do Christian (or Jewish or Muslim or …) parents protect their children from such predators? So long as there are non-state schools providing a curriculum free of ideological indoctrination, or if home schooling is legal, there are options, but those doors seem to be closing in the West. And not everyone has that option – some are financially unable to send their child to a non-state school, and don’t have the time to home school e.g. a single mother. Hmmm how did Russian Christians in the Soviet Union protect their children? That is after all the model of freedom the West is moving towards.

    • Aliquantillus

      By secretly organizing additional biblical and religious curricula outside the school context.

    • Rusty

      Unfortunately, the salvation of the souls of our children is not really up to us as parents. No systematic attempt to insulate them from the world will ensure they embrace what we teach them, especially once they have grown and left home. As a parent, I too am flawed and not everything I try to teach will even be presented in the most effective way, or without my own flawed understanding.

      I think we know that it is ultimately God who calls each person individually, and that holiness is an individual’s response to God’s call. Salvation is one soul at a time, and while we do our best to encourage our children, they all have a path to follow and it won’t necessarily be the one we lay out for them.

      Many of us lived lives that embraced the wider culture before responding to God’s call. I wish I could insulate my children from the pain that living in accordance with “the world” will bring them, but they will ultimately face these things on their own.

      St. Monica, pray for us.

      • Seamrog

        “No systematic attempt to insulate them from the world will ensure they embrace what we teach them…”

        This is true, but it remains our duty to protect their innocence as long, and with as much vigilance as we can.

        It is amazing and depressing what parents will allow their children to view, listen to, and absorb in general.

        You are also correct that tragically, our children will ultimate have to face the world for themselves, but not on their own. Knowing there is first a family (a mother and a father who are still married) behind them, along with a wider community of faith that supports the values we have taught them is a tremendous thing, and not to be underestimated.

        How in the world did a chaperone become a thing of the past?

        • Rusty

          Yes, I agree with you. It was not my intention to suggest our efforts are always in vain, or that we are not obligated to fight the good fight.

          • Seamrog

            I was worried it would sound that way – it was not my intention. I know you were being sincere, my comment was directed more at others who think being quiet is the best course.

  • Kevin Quillen

    first step; stop using their terminology. They are queers. Queer means abnormal. Using their terminology only legitimizes them. Next, all Christian and other right thinking parents REFUSE to acquiesce. Pull your kids from school, get together with other like minded folks and home school. Governments have overstepped their bounds and must be RESISTED!

    • Aliquantillus

      Exactly! They should be called Pederasts or Sodomites, not “gays”.

      • Frank Ryan Freeman

        Same thing to u.

        Using pedarist as opposed to gay will do nothing but hurt them in an unloving and unproductive way. Tbh ur wrong on a deeper level. Both terms r inadequate for different reasons. Pple in the LGBTQ community r simply human beings who have sinful desires they r actin upon. No different from u or me lookin at porn or being mean to someone.

        Tryin to semanticize the term gay vs queer in the context ur talkin about is pointless and mean and unchristian at the highest level so please keep christians out ur convos if ur gonna talk like that.

        The way to help slow down the problem is for Christians to:
        1. Start livin right in our own lives and love other pple.
        2. Start being passionate about all sins; not just the ones republicans tell christians to b passionate about.
        3. Spread the gospel first. Yall so focused on trying to “de-gay” society that u dont realize that it is Christ that walks pple thru all their sinful desires not just the ones u find weird. So introduce Christ in their lives. Then after some of them accept Christ then we can worry about santification.

        • Gary

          God told Moses to kill the homosexuals. Obviously God considers homosexuality to be more serious than you do.

          • Seamrog

            It is one of the sins that ‘cry out for vengeance.’

            Can’t ignore that.

            Also can’t ignore that my sins doomed me to hell. Thank God for the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and repentance.

          • Frank Ryan Freeman

            Gary God is gonna send ANY sinner to hell that doesnt accept the terms of reconciliation that God set about thru Christ so ur counter not only doesnt address anything i said but is not even true in the context u tryna say it in.

        • J_CAS

          The reason that Christians are so “passionate” about this issue is because it is daily set in front of us. Christians in business are now facing legal persecution if they don’t want to sell their services for an event that clearly celebrates sin. Christians are not able to foster or adopt children if they don’t accept transgender ideology. In Canada, at least, Christian families are in danger of losing their own children if a child claims to be “transgender” and the parents will not spring for transitioning their child.

          • Frank Ryan Freeman

            And all those things r wrong, terribly wrong. Howver that has little to do with how Christians r supposed to treat and interact with other pple.

      • Jeremy L

        They are not all pederasts. Your blind accusations mean nothing.

    • Frank Ryan Freeman

      Using queer as opposed to gay will do nothing but hurt them in an unloving and unproductive way. Tbh ur wrong on a deeper level. Both terms r inadequate for different reasons. Pple in the LGBTQ community r simply human beings who have sinful desires they r actin upon. No different from u or me lookin at porn or being mean to someone.

      Tryin to semanticize the term gay vs queer in the context ur talkin about is pointless and mean and unchristian at the highest level so please keep christians out ur convos if ur gonna talk like that.

      The way to help slow down the problem is for Christians to:
      1. Start livin right in our own lives and love other pple.
      2. Start being passionate about all sins; not just the ones republicans tell christians to b passionate about.
      3. Spread the gospel first. Yall so focused on trying to “de-gay” society that u dont realize that it is Christ that walks pple thru all their sinful desires not just the ones u find weird. So introduce Christ in their lives. Then after some of them accept Christ then we can worry about santification.

      • Mary Smith

        You also have some good points. It seems to me that God would have us stand for the truth, but also be engaged and kind to any sinner, while not approving of the sin. Basically, we need to model Jesus’s behaviors and practices in our own.

    • Thisoldspouse

      Even THEY use ‘queer,’ but accuse us of defamation for using the same term. I guess it’s like the “N” word, only for queers.

      Call them sodomites. At least that is the legal term for what they do (sodomy.)

  • passerby1969

    I don’t see a problem with what the teacher did. She was very factual. She explained that a man can marry a man in Canada (and now, the USA). That’s telling kids the truth.
    The Jewish school has to supply kids with factual knowledge that gay people exist. School must prepare students to live and work in the regular society.
    There are issues I have with education about being gay, but the ones you raise are not problems.

    • Rusty

      Facts without context can be and are used as propaganda. Teaching children that some children live in households where one of their parents is in an active, homosexual relationship may be factual, but requiring the schools to put positive context to these facts is a highly political act.

      Let’s face it, schools have always been used to produce graduates who will be absorbed into broader society, and have always taught political attitudes. Our children are now so steeped in progressive liberalism that what is taught by parents is completely undermined.

      • passerby1969

        Rusty, why would a teacher condemn a legal activity? Gay marriage is legal. It should be taught that way to secular and religious kids alike. Speaking as an elementary teacher, I can tell you that “gay” and “families” come up as topics even for very young kids. They are trying to categorize what they see around them.

        • Seamrog

          If you think this is an appropriate topic in school, then you are part of the problem, and a significant danger.

          I would never allow someone like you near any of my kids.

          • Gary

            I agree.

          • David S

            I may go ” warthog” but its a mental spiritual thing that needs different weaponry…ie prayer

          • Mary Smith

            Both prayer and a decision to stand and fight for God’s ways vs. the world’s. If there is no opposition to demonic and worldly forces, they take territory and we lose what used to be a society in which moral foundations were commonly accepted.

          • John Connor

            It is a totally relevant topic. Anything otherwise is a lie.

        • Rusty

          There is a difference between teaching what is (i.e. there are people with homosexual inclinations, including those in longer term homosexual relationships) and putting a stamp of approval on the sexual activity that marks that relationship.

          I fully understand why the government is behind this – they want a society where there is the maximum satisfaction of individual preferences, which implies doing away with the moral stigma associated with various actions that actualize those preferences. Whether it is the de-stigmatization of drug use, sexual activity outside of true marriage (not the pseudo-marriage of same-sex couplings), euthanasia, abortion, divorce, prostitution, pornography, or any other action that has traditionally been viewed through a moral lense, government seeks to reduce social conflict and prefers to re-frame these issues in a way that validates everything through the lens of the state’s approved ontology (i.e. secular materialism). It is a “harm reduction” strategy that views the negative results of these issues as problems to be overcome but that do not impinge the rights of people to actually “do” these things.

          Teaching children to view these things through an amoral prism only damages their ability to discern right from wrong, which is the most important thing a parent can teach their child. It undermines the family, and thereby undermines society, because a society of individuals who are free to pursue (without moral constraints) their personal preferences (including perversions or other morally fraught behaviour) does not create social cohesion, it does the opposite – it creates a decadent society where citizens have no stake in defending the society against threats, because nobody ever died so that another person could smoke pot, sexually exploit whoever they want, and kill themselves with the help of the state under the guise of “freedom”.

        • J_CAS

          No, they are trying to categorize what is being pushed upon them. If it weren’t for schools and the media, they wouldn’t very often encounter gay relationships as the gay population is only about 1% of the total population. It is rare and not the norm.

        • Jason Todd

          Legal doesn’t equal moral.

          • John Connor

            Opinion only

        • Peccatori

          Do think it might be possible that a teacher in a small country school in the south, before 1865 may have told the class of white children that slavery was a good thing? After all, it was legal then. So did the legality of it make it right or good?

          • passerby1969

            Yes. They were teaching it as moral. That was their job. However, slavery contradicts human rights. Someone else being gay does not contradicts their rights nor your rights.

          • Peccatori

            How was it their job to teach slavery as moral? Isn’t a person’s mind separate from the government? Isn’t morality an objective thing? Or do you believe that legality defines morality? Did slavery contradict human rights before or after it was outlawed? Things that are disordered but promoted as normal hurts all of society, objectively. It doesn’t matter how anyone feels about it.

          • Peccatori

            If you doubt the objectivity of whether these things hurt society, look at social relations today and how slavery affected it.

          • Dominic Lombardo

            “However, slavery contradicts human rights.”

            Indeed, that is correct. And that includes the sexual slavery which is inherent in the sodomite/sapphite lifestyle based on acting out sexually on the intrinsic disorder of same-sex attraction.

        • Thisoldspouse

          Smoking is legal, too. Are teachers banned from condemning this activity?

    • J_CAS

      “She was very factual”. Right, because they always report on every minor detail in articles like that. You have no way of knowing what the teacher said *in addition to* what was mentioned in the article. I can tell you from experience that it is *not* the agenda to only report something “factual”, these teachers and books are also giving the message that it’s “okay” despite what the children may be learning at home.

    • Thisoldspouse

      Pederasts exist, too. So do people with a variety of unmentionable sexual predilections. Are children to be filled in on all of the details of these as well based on ‘existence?’

  • Margaret Hargreaves

    Food for thought. After all most scientists seem to put forward the idea that the world is overpopulated and overall birthrates are high enough to see this problem becoming worse by the year. If you could persuade everyone in the world to be gay and, at the same time, abolish scientific/medical intervention for conception the problem would be solved very quickly. I just wouldn’t want to be the last person alive (and alone).

    • passerby1969

      I read that gayness might exist in the animal kingdom (and it does) so there are surrogate parents to care for offspring in case a biological parent dies. That makes sense to me.

      • Rusty

        Any so-called “gayness” that might exist in the animal world is a projection from activists, not something that could ever be scientifically confirmed. Animals are not human, and do not have the capacity to be “gay”. “Gay” is a political construct that attempts to redefine human nature, conflating identity and orientation.

        Animals become attached to each other as is appropriate from the nature of their species, they attempt to satisfy their sexual urges (often with whatever is around, as is attested by any dog owner), and certainly have a range of emotions. They do not possess the ability to reason, and most do not have brains or a physiology that would permit any of the higher order of cognitive or adaptive functions.

        Yes, I have read about the voracious sexual appetites of penguins (including those of the same sex), and we know that many birds form exclusive relationships with other birds. Birds also have reptilian brains, and do what comes naturally to them as birds. Equating observed same-sex sexual activity between animals with the modern understanding of “gay” (i.e. a deep-seated identification of the self through the prism of their sexual attraction) is simply nonsense.

        • Jeremy L

          The “modern understanding of ‘gay” varies. Many would say “gay” refers to simply being attracted to the same sex. Simply acknowledging that you are attracted to only the same sex and having a same-sex relationship and going about life doesn’t really constitute “deep-seated identification of the self through the prism of their sexual attraction”. Sure, there are hyper-sexual people in this world of both heterosexual and homosexual orientation, but being homosexual and expressing your sexuality with a relationship does necessarily mean being obsessed with your sexuality, just as a man having a wife doesn’t mean he’s obsessed with his heterosexuality or lives his life as if his whole being revolves around it.

          • Seamrog

            Because ‘many would say it’ in a ‘modern understanding’ does not mean it is correct, or licit.

            An attraction persons of the same sex is a disorder, and a serious one.

            Like it or not, the studies are there that indicate most ‘gay’ men were sexually abused, or abandoned physically or emotionally by their fathers.

            It is a treatable condition that should not be tolerated and certainly not celebrated.

            Under NO circumstances should they be around children, with whom the cycle repeats itself.

            Not very different from alcoholics and abusive parents…the horrible cycle gets repeated with their children.

          • John Connor

            Citations?

          • Jeremy L

            Consider it a disorder if you want. It’s better than thinking they simply “choose it”. But I would differ with you on any idea that it can be “treated”. There is much evidence that sexual orientation change efforts do not work and often cause terrible damage to self-esteem. As for the “they had daddy issues” or “they were molested” thing, correlation does not equal causation.

          • Rusty

            I agree that there are many opinions about this. However, the claim made by activists is that being “gay” is about “who we are”, and that their sexuality is truly the prism through which they experience the world. If a person establishes a lifestyle and social circle within the “gay” subculture, it would be fair to suggest that the “gay” identity is reinforced. It is normative in that subculture.

            It is often said that “gay” people experienced a sense of being different from the time they were children. Personally, I think it is nonsense, since everybody perceives themselves to be “different” from others, but I can certainly understand why a person who is attracted to members of the same sex will find themselves feeling foreign in an overwhelmingly heterosexual culture. After all, I am Catholic, and I sure feel “different” when considering the zeitgeist.

          • Jeremy L

            Thank you for this civil response. I know several gay people, many of whom are not aligned with what is commonly known as “gay subculture”. And some of whom are in same-sex relationships that are not typical of what people consider stereotypical “gay relationships” (i.e., monogamous, “quiet” as opposed to “in your face”). Are such people “gay”? I would say so. My understanding of homosexual orientation is that it is innate and immutable, and I do not object to stable same-sex relationships, but I think defining yourself by your sexuality and letting your sexuality get out of control is not good and I actually hope gay individuals would move away from the stereotypical “subculture” that embraces promiscuity and lewdness. From what I’ve learned from my friends, being attracted to the same sex was all they ever knew, in terms of their sexuality, and not even deliberate effort could not change that pattern of their attraction.

          • Gary

            Homosexuality violates God’s moral law. You have your opinions, and God has his.

          • Jeremy L

            Thank you so much for sharing, Gary. Keep up the good work over at Westboro Baptist.

          • Gary

            The folks at Westboro Baptist aren’t the only ones who oppose homosexuals.

          • Jeremy L

            I was merely trying to flatter you. You’d fit in well at WBC. The others who oppose homosexuals all seem too soft

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Yes but what evidence ?
            From this, that does not mean that it is innate or they are “born that way ” .

          • Jeremy L

            Well, I know one gay guy whose mother miscarried a girl immediately before conceiving him. And then there’s another whose mother took a lot of fertility drugs. Those uterine hormones sure can have some unusual effects on a fetus under unusual circumstances. Or maybe they just decided randomly they wanted to be gay because they thought it would be fun to disadvantage themselves. After all, we all have the ability to command our genitals to stop responding to the opposite sex and begin responding to the same sex instead when we really want to be “bad”. It just makes sense.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1. Is this, or any of it, conclusive evidence?
            2. Does something that happens prior to something (pregnancy) mean that it will directly effect(affect) or follow to something else or will directly result of this any of this ? (Post hoc)
            3. Even if this was innate to what then does the effects then have on the rest of humanity, if said on the nature of someone being pre-wired ?
            4. Even if not a “choice” that does not mean someone is “born that way” or innate. Several factors and attributes can still be a result or an effect.
            5. Going back to what’s said, even if innate may I ask you this then what then on matters of pedophilia ? If someone’s prewired nature can be effected from birth what then on this, or can pedophiles help who they attracted to and do they choose this way ?

          • Jeremy L

            Pedophiles may very well be born that way. Does that mean raping children is justified? No. That is not hard to understand. We can and should allow same sex relationships because they can be consensual. I’m pretty sure that any and all evidence I could give you would be dismissed by you as “inconclusiveness.” The fact is we do not know the exact factors that make someone gay, but we do see correlation with an unusual uterine environment. We know that moral failing does not make someone attracted to the same sex. Neither does trauma.

          • Gary

            According to the Bible, homosexuality is immoral.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            “Pedophiles may very well be born that way. ”
            So by this are you going to be standing by them since it is or maybe innate ?

            “Does that mean raping children is justified? No. That is not hard to understand.”
            Says who and why ? By what standard or objective moral standard are basing this on ?
            What standard are you basing any of this to this or anything is immoral and how do you of it ?

            ” We can and should allow same sex relationships because they can be consensual. ”
            1. says who (by what standard) ?
            2.So can incestrous couples can be consensual, in fact you can be or have gay incestrous couples. But does or what makes it right and by whom ?

            “I’m pretty sure that any and all evidence I could give you would be dismissed by you as “inconclusiveness.” ”
            How and why ? How will I just “dismiss” the evidence ? What evidence?

            “The fact is we do not know the exact factors that make someone gay, but we do see correlation with an unusual uterine environment. ”
            Again how and what conclusive, or what is the conclusive, evidence? Again What conclusive evidence is there for this ?
            ( or is this an assertion?)

            “We know that moral failing does not make someone attracted to the same sex. Neither does trauma.”
            “Moral failing ” ?
            No one is saying theses are the direct of it, thougheven if true it does that does mean it is innate. Rather the could be considered factors of the final result.

          • Jeremy L

            Shaq, it’s tiring to have to explain once again how you keep making false comparisons. Have people been emboldened to rape children and sleep with their siblings because same-sex marriage is legal? No. There was never any inkling of, “Well, we should all be able to rape children and sleep with our sibilings now!” And this is because the vast majority of people realize the connections you make are non existent. I’m shocked that I would even need to explain why raping children is wrong in spite of the probable innateness of pedophilia. Incest? Anti-social behavior that might lead to children having birth defects, even if the sex is consensual. Gay incest? Anti-social behavior that’s not worth endorsing. But heck, they aren’t producing defective kids with their sex, so let them have it. I don’t care.

            Are you saying it’s just a coincidence that many gay men have older brothers? It’s a fact that a woman’s body begins to be less tolerant toward male fetuses the more she has, and starts feminizing male fetuses because the body perceives it as a foreign object. Instances like miscarrying a female fetus and then immediately conceiving a male as well taking fertility drugs can similarly feminize male fetuses. I’m not saying this is the one cause of male homosexuality, but I am saying it can’t be ignored. Several Christians assert that people are attracted to the same sex because they did something “bad” to make them that way. Several Christians assert that being sexually abused as a child makes you develop same-sex attraction. The difference between me and said Christians is the Christians are making stuff up based on their distrust and dislike of gays whereas I am making objective observations and using reason.

      • Jarrfan

        Never heard of an animal going homosexual, they are ruled by hormones and cycles, birthing times. There are some worms that are both sexes and reproduce on their own. One goat humping another male goat practicing sex is not a homosexual act.

  • Jane

    “Gay” used to mean happy and joyful. Today it refers to the sexual practices of abnormal people. This is NOT normal and should not be “taught” to our children. If a person is homosexual, that is something that used to be hidden BECAUSE it was so wrong. We are totally going against the will of God and to say otherwise is just a lie. “A man shall leave his mother and father and cling to his WIFE”. That’s what the Bible says and anyone who is Christian should know this fact.

    • Andrew Mason

      Actually gay now means defective, lame, broken etc. Of course the PC crowd say that such usage is unacceptable. Problem is they refuse to accept that the hijacking of a word meaning happy and joyful is unacceptable which means in effect they’re declaring themselves the arbiters of language.

      • Jane

        Agreed!

  • Aint So

    Finally! It is astonishing to me that nearly no one seems to understand or be willing to declare that homosexual activity activists such as teachers and administrators in public schools who promote tolerance of this vile crap are always child sexual predators. One can rightfully conclude that acceptance of those beset with homosexual inclinations is an entirely legitimate demonstration for support of the legitimate human rights of these unfortunate individuals. The promotion of tolerance for unnatural homosexual activity to vulnerable children on the other hand is the substance of a vile sexual assault upon the innocent and vulnerable. Homosexual activity activists know they have already won the battle against you because they already have your kids and have probably had you in some measure when you were young, demonstrated by the fact that you routinely provide your children to them for the predation. Surprise! It is likely that homosexual activity activists even had the sympathy of your parents in some measure when they were children, no matter how conservative they may have subsequently become. For generations, multitudes of unsuspecting parents have set up their children up for predation by unwitting complacency. Make no mistake. No matter what you teach your children at home when you ignorantly send them to public schools they will learn and embrace what they are taught there because your children know this is why you sent them there, to learn. I discovered this truth of human nature the hard way.
    Promotion of acceptance of homosexual and other deviant sexual practices is always predatory and cannot be made otherwise, just as vile homosexual practices are among homosexuals. When you promote or engage in unnatural activity which has been demonstrated to sicken and kill others exposed to it, this is never an act of love. Exposing the lives of sexual partners to being shortened by one third does not make you a loving husband, wife, or partner, it makes you a predator and if you promote it, an enemy of humanity. When activists promote these sorts of vile activities against vulnerable children they are always social predators and the activity, criminal. Only a bioincognitive society with a death wish would fail to ostracize such individuals as malignant enemies of all children.

    • Oremus

      Very well said. Thank you for this post. I am going to sign up with Mass Resistance, to help fight this scourge.

  • Winn Seltzer

    This has to be one of the most awful pieces of crap I’ve ever read. Shame on you for writing such horrible things about fellow human beings that just happened to have a different sexual preference than you. Maybe one day you will have a gay child or a gay family member, and hopefully that will change your mind from spewing more poison thought into this world.

    • Seamrog

      He is entirely correct.

      Homosexuals are predators, and children must be protected from them.

      Facts are facts, whether you like them or not. You ignored all of the FACTUAL evidence the author presented and went with a silly emotional outburst.

      Shame you YOU.

      • John Connor

        Proof that gays are predators? There is nothing that points toward them being predators. If you want to see who is responsible for the overwhelming majority of child predation, look in the mirror…

        • Jason Todd

          NAMBLA is one. Ryan Sorba’s undercover video is another.

          But you don’t care, do you?

          Blocked.

          • John Connor

            LMAO!

    • Gary

      God has rules about sexual behavior. Homosexuals violate those rules. You endorse homosexuality while God condemns it. Should we agree with God, or with you?

      • Pigdowndog

        God also commands you to stone naughty children to death. Do you endorse that law? Thought not!
        By the way, god doesn’t exist.

        • Gary

          I endorse whatever God has said. And only fools say that God does not exist.

          • Pigdowndog

            Only fools are gullible enough to think he exists.
            Evidence would be good.
            By your reply you think it’s right to stone naughty children to death.
            Ain’t religion great!

          • Gary

            God is always right.

          • Pigdowndog

            Evidence for his existence first.

          • Gary

            If you’re old enough to read and write, you should already know about the evidence for God’s existence. You have your own reasons for wanting God to not exist.

    • Jeff Tilley

      It’s not Brown who is creating poison, it’s the sinful homosexuals.

      • John Connor

        Brown centers himself around the disparagement of gays

    • Jason Todd

      And do you have anything to say about the article?

      • John Connor

        If he did, you would block him.

  • David S

    This is one of the best articles yet!! Sadly, it is the truth. WinnSeltzr,I feel your pain in denial. Many do not want to accept what the human race is doing. Take prayer out of schools and this is what we get. Prayer to the 1 true G-d. We must ask for forgiveness otherwise the Syrian (Assyrians) will move in…. hmmmm.

    • Dominic Lombardo

      “Take prayer out of schools and this is what we get.”

      I assume that you are referring to prayer and Scripture reading in public schools.

      It is historical fact that said prayers recited in public schools were always Protestant prayers (never the “Hail Mary” or the Nicene Creed, let alone the “Shema” prayer in Hebrew), and that said Scripture readings were invariably from the King James Version of the Holy Bible, never from the Douay-Rheims Bible or a Hebrew Bible – or, for that matter, from a Greek or Ukrainian translation of the Bible (or, later on, from the Revised Standard Version or the Msgr. Ronald A. Knox English translation, either).

      And this was done deliberately, to equate being a good American with being Protestant, in an attempt to induce Catholics (mostly) and Jews to apostasize from their faith and become Protestant. This tapped into the most deep-seated bigotry in the American psyche – namely, anti-Catholicism. And it was good of the U.S. Supreme Court to remove it from public schools back in 1962 – though the majority did so for the wrong reason (it should have been because of the violation of First Amerndment freedom of religion rights of Catholics and Jews, not because of a so-called “wall of separation” between church and states never intended by the framers of the U.S. Constitution).

      On the other hand, one might contend that the sodomites and sapphites and their friends, supporters, fellow-travelers, and “useful idiots” are merely applying the same principles and using the same tactics today as the Protestants did for decades with school prayer and Scripture reading – only their proselytizing and propagandizing for what is intrinsically disordered, and upon which acting out sexually is always evil, puts the shoe on the other foot, so to speak.

  • There are a lot of young teachers who need to convince themselves and their students that it is OK to be promiscuous, gay, agnostic, vegan, use alcohol or drugs, cross-dress and/or form a marriage with anyone. Once behavior is decriminalized too many young adults confuse legality and morality. Deviant and unwise behavior is no longer recognized for what it is. Wise teachers refrain from subjects before a child understands his or her family values and why the family encourages a healthy discrimination.

  • Jeremy L

    Winn Seltzer is right. This is a piece of crap. And I fully expect that Gary’s psychopathic, Westboro Baptist Church-attending self is going to “correct” me and everyone’s going to support him as he openly wishes for the death of gays without any of the moderators intervening because they hate gays just as much as all of the commenters here.

    How are GSA’s “recruiting” anyone? GSA’s exist because many young gay people are rejected by their families/friends. GSA’s are support groups. Finding that you are attracted to the same sex and having your very humanity rejected for something as trivial as that by not only complete strangers, but people closest to you, can be traumatizing. I suppose we should shut down the GSA’s to up the gay suicides. I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if you all said a resounding “YES.”

    There is no harm in teaching children to respect people who are gay. This is not teaching them to be gay. You cannot “teach” someone to be gay. You people want to teach children to hate gays because you hate gays and you want everyone to hate gays so gays can be eradicated for no reason other than you hate them. YOU are the ones who are hurting children. You come here to read lies to fuel your hatred. You people are positively addicted to hate. You can’t stop hating. Hating is all you know. Brown has wasted his life choosing to be addicted to hate. He’s so pathetically scared of his own death, he has to find someone to be his scapegoat to assure himself that HE is heaven-bound and those “dirty others” are not. And the same goes for all of you. Cowards. Monstrous, amoral, self-centered, unfeeling cowards.

  • Peccatori

    Great article, good summary at the end.
    The APA, American Psychological Association, had same sex attraction or attraction to the same sex listed as a psychological disorder, until 1973, when political pressure from within the APA caused it to be delisted. I believe it was a panel vote, not scientific evidence, for delisting it. This agenda began before then, but that was a watershed moment for this movement.
    The most curious thing about all of this is that people can be convinced that their feelings are a better gauge of reality than, well, reality. Or, they convince themselves of this?
    The perennial question to this has been, are they born with it or do they chose it? From the research I’ve done the answer is no… to both questions!
    The attraction is rooted in the experiences of their life and their perceptions of those experiences. For example, the thought that ‘I’m not like the other boys, therefore, maybe I not one.’ Along with teasing and disparaging remarks from their peers for not fitting in. This is a social / psychological / developmental issue. Based on the person’s experiences and perceptions of those experiences from birth to puberty. Puberty is when the sexual expression of the attraction comes into play, that’s why they are targeting the kids at such a young age.
    They like to claim that its the pressures of society’s social constructs that make them feel shame or depressed or any other emotional unrest for having this attraction. Therefore they must change society’s social construct. But its not that, the sourch of the internal emotional unrest, after realizing this attraction, is the knowledge that even small children know that we’re all born with, it is natural for male and female to pair, and unnatural for two of the same sex to pair.
    So they need to convince the rest of the world that its okay, not for our benefit, but for theirs, to ease their own consciences.
    They need help, living contrary to how they are born physically as a boy or girl is not helpful, statistics bear out that it has extremely damaging effects. Higher suicide, drug use, depression in LGBT population shows this.
    Someone who realizes they are attracted to the same sex, must go through the mental gymnastics to decide which of the two roles they should play or fit into, this struggle is the indication in itself that pairing two requires complementarity and we’re all born with that knowledge. And that should all point back to the reality that the male body or female body makes no sense without the complementarity of the other, it needs the opposite to reveal the full meaning and purpose. But that intuition is made mute by the overwhelming message that this article talks about.
    If you know or have someone in your life with same sex attractions, love them and try to help them if you can, by standing for truth.
    Peace.

    • O’Pinyon

      I think you meant “source”, but sourch is descriptive, sounding like something that would cause unrest.

    • Dominic Lombardo

      Great comment – except that it was the American Psychiatric Association (not “Psychological”) which voted in 1973 to remove homosexuality and lesbianism from the list of psychiatric disorders in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. You are correct, though, in that that vote was the result of purely political pressure on the part of sodomites and sapphites both inside the APA and outside the APA – and their friends, supporters, fellow-travelers, and “useful idiots.” There was no scientific basis then for de-listing same-sex attraction, nor is there now. (Quite the contrary: ample evidence exists to justify restoring same-sex attraction to the list of psychiatric disorders.) Those supporting that change at the time were quite candid and overt in saying that science had nothing to do with the decision, and political pressure had everything to do with it. (And the pressure campaign on the APA had been going on for a while before 1973; it wasn’t “a bolt from the blue.”)

      True, the American Psychological Association – and several other professional health-science organizations – eventually followed suit and caved in to the demands of “die neue Stuermabteilung.”

      And, some years later, the American Psychiatric Association went further and removed gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria from the list of psychiatric disorders in the DSM – once again, with no scientific basis, and as the result of political pressure from within ONLY.

      • Peccatori

        Thanks for the correction. In any case, the agenda is evident, and the science has taken a back seat.
        Funny how when enough time goes by, science confirms the teachings of the Faith.

  • Richard M. Castaldo

    90% of LGBTQ people are not about indoctrination of children, the article is only true if you apply it to liberal elite steering the LGBTQ movement from the top. Please recognize the difference next time Mr. Brown.

    • Shaquille Harvey

      But it’s the liberal party that has been guiding and helping the LGBT movement!?!

    • Roberto Deramo

      IF 90% do not support this…… where the hell are they in condeming it then??????????????

  • O’Pinyon

    We have an enemy who is after all of us, especially our children. He takes whatever form works at the time – a serpent, a person suggesting sinful behavior – even St. Peter, at one point. We must be watchful of the tactics of “the lord of the flies” and defeat him by the power of our resurrected Savior.

    • Dehelen Bonner

      St. Peters was not considered to be one of the truly saint, and not qualify for one of the Deciples of Jesus Christ!!!

      • Dehelen Bonner

        We must protect our children at all cost…I agree, we all must be a Voice, crying out into the wilderness, of God’s imminent return to save and rule over mankind, the way God intended it to be!!! God help us all!!!

      • O’Pinyon

        I wanted to identify Peter, and he is widely known as “St. Peter”.
        But, we are all saints, who are set apart as followers of Jesus.
        Peter was imperfect and he denied Christ, but he was restored by His Lord, and ours.

  • O’Pinyon

    Children naturally look up to their teachers. To teach children perversity is child abuse.
    To allow teachers to teach children perversity is child abuse.
    May God have mercy on us all, especially the children.

    • Pigdowndog

      The only perversity that kids are indoctrinated into is believing there’s a magic sky fairy overlooking everything they do.
      That’s child abuse.
      Homosexuality is perfectly normal if you’re gay.
      Why not join us in the 21st century where your mediaeval mindset is in decline.

      • J_CAS

        Ah yes, the old “21st century” statement. Not an argument. None of what you say is an actual argument.

        • Pigdowndog

          You’re right it’s not argument it’s fact.

          • As I was saying…

            An argument is merely a point to what you are saying. You are right that you have no argument.

            The “big bang” is a theory invented by Fr George Lemaitre, and was wholly rejected by the pagans of the day because they claimed it was “creationist propaganda.”

            That you pagans would seek to adopt it now without an ounce of irony and use it to justify your silly denial of God is hilarious.

          • Pigdowndog

            Lemaitre didn’t “invent” the theory, he noted that an expanding universe could be traced back in time to an originating single point.

            “That you pagans would seek to adopt it now without an ounce of irony and use it to justify your silly denial of God is hilarious.”
            So you are better informed that scientists like Stephen Hawking or Laurence Krauss are you?
            Oh dear!

          • As I was saying…

            Yes, Father Lemaitre invented the theory. You claim that Fr Lemaitre didn’t invent the theory, but then in the exact same sentence say: “he noted that an expanding universe could be traced back in time to an originating single point.”

            That is what inventing the theory means.

            The theory is nothing more than a basic proof of God that has always been stated by the Church: that all contingent things are based on an uncontingent source.

            That is why you trying to use that as an excuse for your paganism is hilarious. The pagans of the day hated the Big Bang theory because they claimed it was “creationist propaganda.”

            And yes, I do know more than those fools you stated considering they are wannabe philosophers of a pagan religion. They speak about things they know nothing about, just like you.

          • Pigdowndog

            “And yes, I do know more than those fools you stated”
            That idiotic statement eliminates you from any sensible conversation so goodbye.

          • As I was saying…

            So no argument then.

            I believe I said more than just that one half-sentence.

          • Pigdowndog

            You did and it doesn’t detract from the idiocy.
            You’re stating that you know more than highly educated eminent physicists who can back up their claims with empirical evidence about the Big Bang theory.
            You accuse the likes of Stephen Hawking of speaking ” about things they know nothing about”
            If that’s not brazen idiocy then you’re more deluded than you appear to be.

          • As I was saying…

            Empirical evidence about what? All they do is make bad philosophical claims.

            They spend their days trying to start a pagan religion and are followed by fools who know even less than they do.

          • Pigdowndog

            ” All they do is make bad philosophical claims”
            You don’t understand how peer reviewed evidence works do you?
            I should stop posting uneducated comments if I were you.
            It’s embarrassing.

          • As I was saying…

            Peer reviewing is why they claim that “97% of scientists” are for the pagan belief of environment worship, because “peers” will not review works critical of if.

            Stop threatening me coward, get an argument.

          • Pigdowndog

            Where the Hell did I threaten You?
            I’m afraid this conversation is now at an end as you have no idea what you’re talking about let alone understand how science peer review works.

      • Gary

        If God is not real, then “child abuse” is just an opinion.

        • Pigdowndog

          It’s still abuse to indoctrinate children with lies.

          • Gary

            You have no reason to say that.

          • Pigdowndog

            I have every reason to say that.
            Filling vulnerable children’s heads with supernatural nonsense is child abuse.
            They deserve information that can be verified with evidence.
            Religion is a cancer on this world.

          • Gary

            That may be your opinion, but so what?

          • Pigdowndog

            I value the minds of children more than you obviously.
            Why lie to them?

          • Gary

            No, you don’t value the minds of children more than I do. You and I disagree on what the truth is.

          • Pigdowndog

            The truth in my mind is what can be verified with evidence.
            You seem to prefer mythology as opposed to fact.
            I care what children believe.

          • Gary

            I like facts and evidence too. I believe God exists because of facts and evidence.

          • Pigdowndog

            Give me one piece of verifiable evidence that god exists.

          • Gary

            The existence of the universe. The existence of life. None of that would exist if it had not been made. It didn’t make itself and it didn’t happen by chance. Someone had to make it. I believe that someone was God (the God of the Bible). Who do you believe it was?

          • Pigdowndog

            The existence of the universe is due to The Big Bang, verified by evidence.
            The existence of life is due to chemical reaction. See Miller Urey experiment.
            If something has to have a creator who made your god?
            How do you know it was that god and not one of the many millions of the other gods that people claim to exist?
            You only believe in your god because of geography.
            We are here wholly due to natural circumstances.

          • Gary

            The Big Bang could never result in the universe as it exists. It isn’t possible. Explosions never produce order.
            If life is due to chemical reaction, who produced the chemicals? You are really saying that all of it happened by chance. But that isn’t possible. Nothing happens by chance. Chance is nothing and can’t make anything happen.
            The universe and life were made by someone. The only real argument is about who it was.

          • Pigdowndog

            So you know better than highly trained physicists who can provide evidence for how the universe came into being?
            The chemicals were formed in The Big Bang verified by scientific evidence.
            We are here due to a happy accident, nothing more.
            Once again, if something has to have a creator, who made your god?

          • As I was saying…

            Ok, all things that are contingent and created need an uncontingent source and uncreated creator.

            That is God. Verifiable by basic reason, logic, and intellectual honesty.

            You also have 2000 years of recorded miracles as well as the sacraments,

          • Pigdowndog

            ” uncreated creator.”
            That’s highly convenient!
            You don’t get to make stuff up so where’s your evidence for that claim.

            “You also have 2000 years of recorded miracles as well as the sacraments”
            Nonsense.

          • As I was saying…

            You can look up the history of the Church and all of the miracles. You can also look up the sacraments which are Graces of God that valid priests can give.

            That all creation needs to be traced back to an uncreated creator is the Big Bang theory that you love so much. Again, laughable that you reject it while also pretending to use it against the Church that created it.

          • Dehelen Bonner

            Satan is wrought with blood of the saints of God people… He knows that he have but a short time to kill, deceive, lie, destroy, and manipulate mankind!!! Rebuke the devil in all his false teachings Of religion and God…… God will be the only Savior of mankind!!!!

          • passerby1969

            Your remarks make me embarrassed to be from a Christian background. I understand Jesus to be about kindness and understanding and mercy. I don’t want my kid growing up in fear. Satan is selfishness and righteousness.

          • As I was saying…

            You understand nothing.

            You also have much to fear because you are clearly in a state of mortal sin.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1.What evidence ?
            2. You mean how atheistic/ secularism has been in the last century?

          • Pigdowndog

            1 Evidence for your god, or any god come to that.
            2 We are a growing band. Thankfully.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1. What ?
            2.and this means what exactly? How does this prove anything?
            How does it prove any morality?
            In certain places Christianity is growing! ?
            “Thankfully” for whom how does that change the last century

          • Pigdowndog

            1 I repeat. Evidence for a god of any flavour.
            2 It proves that ancient mythology is being seen for what it is. Fiction.
            Christianity is “growing” mostly in underdeveloped lands. In the West it’s atrophying rapidly.
            Education eradicates superstition.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1. What evidence are you looking for ?
            2.1.what “underdeveloped countries “even though it is also growing in certain countries where secular socialism once held. 2. What “superstition”? Or are you just repeating atheistic rhetoric again ?

          • Pigdowndog

            1 Any verifiable evidence that confirms that a god exists. You choose.
            2 Nepal, Mongolia, Benin, South Sudan, Mali to name a few but the reason is mainly due to immigration and conversion so inherently susceptible to faith.
            3 The superstition that an all powerful all knowing deity exists.

          • Dehelen Bonner

            Such rederick coming from the people that’s false, I’m appalled that some of you have become a vessel of evil… I pray that God will reveal to you the truth, for now you are so blind!!! Lift the veil of lies and come into the light, God loves you!!!!

          • Pigdowndog

            I’m appalled that supposedly educated grown ups still believe this superstitious nonsense.
            “Lift the veil of lies and come into the light”
            Very good advice.
            Why not not take it?

        • John Connor

          You can actually observe child abuse. Your god has never been seen

          • As I was saying…

            God is not a contingent part of creation as God created everything and there is nothing outside of God.

            The argument that empiricism ism the only valid form of thought is philosophical and therefore self-refuting.

      • Shaquille Harvey

        1. What magic sky fairy?
        2. Who says homosexuality is normal ?
        3. What does the year or century have to do with this or any of it ? Since when were years or centuries objective and absolute?
        4. What has the Middle Ages also got to do with this ?
        5. “Indoctrination ” where ? Why don’t you think people can’t come to thier own conclusions ?

        • Pigdowndog

          1 You’re right. There seems to be thousands of the buggers.
          2 Everyone who is gay.
          3 Mindset. It’s the system we use.
          4 See answer to No 3.
          5 Filling children’s minds with unverifiable nonsense and happily more and more people are rejecting superstitious mythology.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1. Thousands of what “buggers”
            2. So what then ?
            3. Who’s we ? A mindset thats used by certain people, but yet it does not provide a valid argument.
            4. Again this means what ? Drawing up and making a certain era of the past, that helped paved the way for future generations, into demeaning generalisation and view (this nothing but chronological and modern snobby at best )
            5. What “superstitious mythology”?

          • Pigdowndog

            1 Gods
            2 You’re right. So what? I couldn’t care less if someone’s gay. None of my business.
            3 Atheists. Rational logical beings with validity on their side as theists cannot provide evidence for their beliefs.
            4 Are you denying the mindset of that age? (“chronological and modern snobby at best”) !!!
            5 Religious belief.

      • O’Pinyon

        “Being modern” is not a value that I share. “Being free” is.
        Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.

        • Pigdowndog

          “”Being modern” is not a value that I share.”
          Obviously!

          “Being free” is”
          With the shackles of religion clamped around your mind I wouldn’t class that as freedom.

          “Jesus replied”
          Mythological characters are not able to “reply”. Illogical.

          “everyone who sins is a slave to sin.”
          Sin is a religious concept which I don’t accept.

          • LM

            You will someday.

          • Pigdowndog

            I will what someday?

    • Dominic Lombardo

      The word is “perversion.”

      Other than that (and your implicit denial of sainthood to St. Peter in your reply to Ms. Bonner), you’re right.

  • Gary

    Pigdowndog, Due to the technical limitations of this website, I am unable to reply to your post below. So I’ll reply here.

    The universe and life could never be the result of a “happy accident”. Chance has no ability to produce anything. If the universe and life were not made by a being that had the ability to make them, they would not exist. Exactly like the fact that the house you live in had to be made by someone, or it would not exist.

    The God of the Bible is eternal. He never had a beginning and will never have an ending. If there was ever a “time” when nothing existed, then there would still be nothing. Nothing never produces anything.

    • John Connor

      Opinion only

      • Gary

        It is a fact that the universe and life could never happen by chance. It is also a fact that the universe and life didn’t make themselves. It is also a fact that there must be a being who had no beginning and who existed before the universe and life came to exist. If no such being exists, then neither would the universe or life exist, for the reasons I have already stated. The only thing I said that might be an opinion is that the God of the Bible is that eternal being. But if it isn’t the God of the Bible, then it is certainly some other being. And that is not opinion, but fact.

        • John Connor

          Can you provide some citations for that claim about how the universe and life came to be?

          Definitely nothing more than personal opinion. You provided nothing to support your claim.

          • Gary

            You would have to prove that what I listed as facts are not true. Can you? If you can’t, then you have no way to know that what I said is nothing more than personal opinion. If nothing (chance) can make physical things, then there should be some evidence of that. Can you name anything that came into existence without a cause? Can you name anything that made itself? Did you make yourself? Did the car you drive make itself? If you can’t name something that made itself, or that came to exist without a cause, wouldn’t that mean your beliefs are false?

          • John Connor

            Have your god show himself……then we’ll talk.

          • J_CAS

            Prove that something can come from nothing.

          • John Connor

            I can’t prove that anymore so than you can prove the existence of your supernatural being

          • Gary

            It’s simple: you are unwilling to accept evidence.

          • John Connor

            There is no evidence

          • Gary

            There is lots of evidence. You are just illogical.

          • John Connor

            None whatsoever

          • As I was saying…

            You purposely blind yourself because you think denying God denies your shame.

          • J_CAS

            Ah good, glad you said that. So, what is your worldview, then? How did we get here, what are we doing here, what’s wrong with the world, and how do we fix it?

          • John Connor

            I believe in evolution and dead is dead.

          • J_CAS

            What’s your definition of evolution?

          • John Connor

            Look it up….it’s there for all to see.

          • J_CAS

            No. There are different definitions/understandings of evolution. I am asking *you* what your definition of evolution is.

          • Gary

            You won’t believe what you already see, so if God showed himself to you how would you know he was real?

          • John Connor

            He could perform really cool magic tricks

          • Ohso

            God is not a small case ‘g’ as presented by pompous pedantic blowhards – Provide Your Evidence or admit that it is just another sophomoric playgame – like ‘I prayed to God for a pony for Christmas, and not getting one Proves that there is no God.’
            Childish sophistry is not science – but silly buggers.

          • 50 lbs of crazy 10 lb bag

            That’s not actually how debate works, Gary. You have to attempt to prove something before anyone can disprove it.

        • Ohso

          Indeed – pseudo scientists have absolutely nothing to offer as to the state of Infinity & Eternity before the supposed ‘Big Bang’ – although Logic says that there Must have been Something before (which they refuse to discuss) as opposed to Nothing.

    • Pigdowndog

      “The God of the Bible is eternal. He never had a beginning and will never have an ending”
      That’s highly convenient!
      The link to your latest comment in which you resorted to abuse didn’t work so I’ve had to find you on here.
      Just to let you know that when someone has to resort to name calling they have lost the argument.
      I highly suggest you do some research on the beginnings of the universe.
      I can guarantee you won’t find a god hiding in the research.

      • Gary

        From your previous comments, you believe the universe came to exist “by chance”. But that is not possible. And it isn’t logical. Arguing with you about it is unproductive because you refuse logic.

        • Pigdowndog

          “But that is not possible. ”
          Explain why it is impossible. Highly trained physicists tell me that it’s so.
          Do you honestly know more than Laurence Krauss, Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynman, Albert Einstein?
          May I suggest you read more than one book.

          ” Arguing with you about it is unproductive because you refuse logic.People who are not logical won’t face reality.”
          Irony at its best.

          • Gary

            Chance is nothing. It does not exist. You claim that something that does not exist made things that do exist. It should be obvious to everyone who has a working brain that something that does not exist cannot make anything. When people say “it happened by chance”, what they mean is they have no clue how it could have happened. If you said the house you live in just appeared one day, by chance, everyone would look at you like you had two heads because they know that houses never happen by chance; they all have a builder. The universe is much more complicated than a house. So is life. Even single celled life is more complicated than a house. When you claim that the universe and life happened by chance, everyone knows you are wrong, even if they won’t say it.

          • Ohso

            Chesterton said that an ‘Atheist’ is someone who Believes (without Facts to support the belief) that Absolutely Everything came about from Absolutely Nothing.

    • Ohso

      Neither Infinity nor Eternity constitute ‘name calling’ – rather they are Facts which the Human Mind has an Eternal Infinite relationship with – which cannot be answered by radical leftist gender feminist homosex Misandry (Hatred of Men & Boys, Masculinity & Normal Heterosexuality) – no matte how pseudo ‘tolerant’ the inane Scam being pushed.

      “Pander or Perish’ = the ‘gospel’ of the Gaystapo

  • glenbo

    Teaching diversity and acceptance is not “coming after your kids.”

    It teaches kids not to go after those they have been taught by religion to hate for no rational reason.

    Way to go Michael Brown in creating hysteria and fanning the flames of hate.

  • Jeremy L

    My gosh, almost all of the dissenting comments are “awaiting moderation”, even the most mild dissenting comments. Is this some attempt at suppression? If so, why? If we really are clearly, obviously wrong, why do we need to be suppressed?

    • Lydia Hanning

      Too bad. Their site, their rules. Nobody owes you a platform. If you want to trash Christians and other people guilty of wrongthink, there are plenty of gay friendly sites for you to do so.

      • Jeremy L

        So much for free speech

Inspiration
Reflecting the Glory of The King
Austin Roscoe
More from The Stream
Connect with Us