Let’S Face It, We Want To Indoctrinate Children

[BCSpace]

While gay activists usually deny that they want to indoctrinate children, said Villarreal, “let’s face it—that’s a lie.” “We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it,” he wrote.

Villarreal pointed to the tactics of a gay activist group FCKH8, which fought a recent Tennessee bill prohibiting classroom discussion of homosexuality in grade school by “hir[ing]some little girls to drop F-bombs” in their controversial online ad campaign, and handing out gay paraphernalia to schoolchildren. “Recruiting children? You bet we are,” he said.

“Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?”

In fact, Villarreal said that his dream of increasing not only the acceptance, but the future practice of homosexuality among youngsters was common among those in the gay lobby.

“I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT,” he wrote.

Gay columnist: let’s face it, we want to indoctrinate children

The deeper underlying article is here (warning: explicit language and inappropriate images):

Remember, Prop 8 passed along age lines with the very old voting largely in favor of it. The younger generation doesn’t fear homosexuality as much because they’re exposed to fags on TV, online, and at school. And I don’t know a single lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person who wants that to stop. I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that it’s OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak.

Can We Please Just Start Admitting That We Do Actually Want To Indoctrinate Kids?

Of course all this has been known for decades, but suppressed by the media and those sympathetic to PC or who find it too difficult to face the facts. This view is the norm in the homosexual counter-culture but you won't hear it from their emissaries; some of whom post here. Supporters of Planned Parenthood are also supporting the above referenced agenda through it's international organization.

Is this agenda in direct opposition to the gospel of Jesus Christ and the doctrines of the LDS Church? I think so. You?

[bluebell]

Is 'queer' a derragatory term? I'm honestly not sure.

[Jaybear]

Is 'queer' a derragatory term? I'm honestly not sure.

Depends on who uses the term, and in what context.

I once upset Pahoran for using the term the Brethren, rather than the long form "Leaders of the LDS Church."

[frankenstein]

As I understand it, "they" can use queer and the f word...its sort of retaking words. Much like the pink triangle, which stems from Nazi camps wherein homosexuals were given a pink triangle to wear. Not sure how the rainbow came about for the group.

[thesometimesaint]

frankenstein:

Human sexuality comes in all colors of the rainbow.

[CARPE DIEM]

Is 'queer' a derragatory term? I'm honestly not sure.

Strange; odd < > bout' sums it up? But then again what is considered normal anymore?

[thesometimesaint]

CARPE DIEM:

It is considered normal if it lies in the center of a bell shaped curve. IE; Normal intelligence is considered 100 on the IQ scale, with delineations for about every 10 points. So the range for normal intelligence is 90-110.

[Daniel2]

In related news, from GALLOP:

For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage

Gallup shows 53 percent say it should be legal, up from 44 percent last year

May 20, 2011

by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time in Gallup's tracking of the issue, a majority of Americans (53%) believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages. The increase since last year came exclusively among political independents and Democrats. Republicans' views did not change.

These results are based on Gallup's May 5-8 Values and Beliefs poll, which has tracked attitudes toward legalizing same-sex marriage each year since 2004, adding to Gallup's initial polling on the topic in 1996 and 1999.

This year's nine-percentage-point increase in support for same-sex marriage is the largest year-to-year shift yet measured over this time period. Two-thirds of Americans were opposed to legalized same-sex marriage in 1996, with 27% in favor. By 2004, support had risen to 42% and, despite some fluctuations from year to year, stayed at roughly that level through last year.

Democrats' and Independents' Greater Acceptance Shifts the Balance

Democrats' and independents' support for legalized same-sex marriage increased this year by 13 and 10 points, respectively. Republicans' views on the issue did not change from last year. Clear majorities of both Democrats and independents now support gay marriage, 69% and 59% respectively, contrasted with 28% support among Republicans.

Majorities of moderates and liberals support gay marriage, as they did last year, contrasted with 28% of conservatives.

Support for Legal Same-Sex Marriage Decreases Sharply With Age

Support for legal gay marriage decreases markedly with age, ranging from 70% support among those aged 18 to 34, to 39% support among those 55 and older. More broadly, support is highest among younger women and lowest among older men.

Compared with last year, support for legalizing same-sex marriage increased most among younger, 18- to 34-year-old Americans, and among men under 50.

Support for legal same-sex marriage is higher among those who attend church less frequently, among Catholics than among Protestants, and among those who are unmarried.

Implications

This year marks a significant uptick in support for legalizing same-sex marriage, exceeding the symbolic 50% mark for the first time in Gallup's history. Support rose from 27% in 1996 to the low 40% range in 2004 and remained fairly constant through last year.

The issue does, however, remain highly divisive. While big majorities of Democrats and young people support the idea of legalizing same-sex marriage, fewer than 4 in 10 Republicans and older Americans agree. Republicans in particular seem fixed in their opinions; there was no change at all in their support level this year, while independents' and Democrats' support jumped by double-digit margins.

Within the past year, Congress passed and President Obama signed a law allowing gay and lesbian members of the military to openly reveal their sexual orientation, rather than keeping it hidden as part of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. A majority of Americans have supported such a change in policy since 2005, rising to two-thirds support in 2009 and again last year. It is unclear whether the highly publicized official change in government policy on Don't Ask, Don't Tell may have been a factor in the rise in Americans' support for legalizing same-sex marriage.

Most legislation dealing with legalizing same-sex marriage occurs at the state level. At this point, five states -- Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont, plus the District of Columbia -- allow legal same-sex marriages. Most of the remaining states specifically outlaw it. At the moment, those advocating changes in constitutions and laws to allow same-sex marriage in additional states can take heart in the apparent shift in national sentiment in their direction.

Edited to add the obligatory quotation of Alma 10:19:

"...if the time should come that the voice of this people should achoose iniquity, that is, if the time should come that this people should fall into transgression, they would be ripe for destruction."

The end is coming soon... (though probably not by May 21st).

Darin

[Nofear]

One should be cautious as the above polls have the potential to be heavily pregnant with the Bradley effect.

[Libs]

Is indoctrination a bad thing, if it's for the good? I tend to think less prejudice against gays and same-sex families, would be a good thing.

[Sky]

When teenagers are taught at church (not just LDS) that sexuality should only be expressed between a husband and wife and that anything else is sinful - but then are taught the opposite at school, it could potentially cause a significant conflict for the teenagers, their parents, and the school system.

It’s yet another example of religion and popular culture/political correctness clashing with each other.

As if it weren’t hard enough already, it just makes it that much harder to instill traditional Judeo-Christian standards of morality into the rising generation.

If I had an elementary-school aged child, I personally would not be okay with them reading ‘Heather Has Two Mommies’ or ‘King & King.’ A common courtesy that the public school system could do is inform the parents of what is being taught. If the parents give their permission, then so be it. I believe it should be optional – not mandatory.

[Daniel2]

When teenagers are taught at church (not just LDS) that sexuality should only be expressed between a husband and wife and that anything else is sinful - but then are taught the opposite at school, it could potentially cause a significant conflict for the teenagers, their parents, and the school system.

Acknowledging the reality that marriage exists for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples isn't the same thing as teaching about expressing "sexuality."

Unless you you're OK with the implication that anything that teaches about marriage (EVERY Disney Princess movie...?!) is actually "teaching about the expression of sexuality"...?

Darin

[Sky]

Acknowledging the reality that marriage exists for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples isn't the same thing as teaching about expressing "sexuality."

Unless you you're OK with the implication that anything that teaches about marriage (EVERY Disney Princess movie...?!) is actually "teaching about the expression of sexuality"...?

Darin

No need to split hairs over this – I think the end result is about the same either way. What it boils down to is they want young people to believe that marriage for same-sex and opposite-sex couples are equally valid and acceptable.

The expression of sexuality is something that kids will start to understand as soon as they reach puberty. But the message coming from the schools seems clear to me – there is no problem with having a same-sex partner.

[Libs]

I am going to "split a hair", because I do see a difference, in what you are expressing, and what the goal (for public school) should be (IMHO).

No one has to "believe" that same sex marriage and hetero marriage are "equal", but they do need to understand and respect that their are differing opinions and that in a public setting people DO have to be "treated" equally, regardless of their beliefs. (That goes for religion, politics, race, gender, etc, as well as, sexual orientation).

That's my split hair (that I believe is actually very significant).

We cannot continue to marginalize same sex couples and their families. That is not right nor fair, and it has had some very, very bad consequences (suicide, mental illness, low self-esteem, homelessness, etc). We do need to move in a more positive direction.

[Mordecai]

In related news, from GALLOP...

Why would it go up 9% in one year? That doesn't make sense. That is a HUGE jump. Perhaps they left out the opportunity to allow civil unions instead.

[Fly Fisherman]

We cannot continue to marginalize same sex couples and their families.

The argument from the religious side is that as same-sex marriage gains acceptance, religion will have its role in society decreased, and perhaps one day "marginalized".

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No3_Severinoonline.pdf

Please understand that this is at least in part why so many of a religious persuasion are against the state recognition of same-sex marriage - the OP demonstrates this along with this Harvard Law journal legal analysis.

[Sky]

Why would it go up 9% in one year? That doesn't make sense. That is a HUGE jump. Perhaps they left out the opportunity to allow civil unions instead.

Honestly, I’m not surprised by the GALLOP poll. Regardless if we like it or not, it seems undeniable to me that this is the direction that society is moving in. For many gays and lesbians, civil unions are simply not good enough. It feels like ‘separate but equal’ to them. Nothing short of full-scale marriage will make them happy. I think churches that teach traditional standards of morality have reason to be concerned.

[Libs]

The argument from the religious side is that as same-sex marriage gains acceptance, religion will have its role in society decreased, and perhaps one day "marginalized".

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No3_Severinoonline.pdf

Please understand that this is at least in part why so many of a religious persuasion are against the state recognition of same-sex marriage - the OP demonstrates this along with this Harvard Law journal legal analysis.

I understand what you're saying, but this ONE belief is not all there is to religion, and I don't see how marginalizing that one belief, will reduce the role of religion in society, as a whole.

We can't just continue to publicly discriminate against people, because of religious belief, when these people in, actuality, are doing nothing to harm anyone....just trying to live their lives and raise their children, like everyone else.

[Mordecai]

We can't just continue to publicly discriminate against people...

Treating different behaviors differently is rational. It's not discrimination and not religious belief. As Ken Starr argued in favor of prop. 22, this is all about people demanding the same name even though their behavior is different. It's not about the "rights" associated with marriage.

The argument from the religious side is that as same-sex marriage gains acceptance, religion will have its role in society decreased, and perhaps one day "marginalized".

I've never heard this argument made. Not once. Of course, I've argued that gay-marriage dogma being adopted by the gov't represents a minority culture based on spurious premises swallowing the cultural majority's reasonable position, via top-down, far-left social engineering.

I guess if you label the majority's culture of valuing real marriage a "religion," it gives you some sort of moral high ground. But in reality, the majority's culture is just as much based on cultural evolution and nature as it is religion. Meanwhile, the premise that a gay union has no relevant differences from a real marriage is an absurd one. Only a fool thinks a man is the same as a woman in a family environment, that there are no relevant differences. Only a left-wing drone would believe that an absent biological father is irrelevant.

[california boy]

Personally I think everyone is naturally born gay. If you look at the behavior of typical small boys, they think girls are icky. They want nothing to do with them. Every young boy knows that girls have the cooties. But society is so bent on indoctrination them in the heterosexual agenda that it causes them to become straight. They hear this straight agenda in their schools, churches and the public square. The straight agenda is on every TV show and Hollywood glamorizes it in the movies. Entire movies are made pushing heterosexuality on our youth.. The straight agenda is in their text books in our public schools from the age of 5 and taught directly in the classrooms on a regular basis.

It is amazing to me that through all of this straight indoctrination agenda that any kid survives to remain gay when they grow up. Americans need to start standing up against this radical right wing conspiricy shoved down our throats by the right wing media. If we don't make a stand against this radical ideology, our youth will be lost forever.

[BCSpace]

Edited to add the obligatory quotation of Alma 10:19:

"...if the time should come that the voice of this people should achoose iniquity, that is, if the time should come that this people should fall into transgression, they would be ripe for destruction."

So do you believe the verse or not with regards to the people choosing to accept homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle?

Acknowledging the reality that marriage exists for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples isn't the same thing as teaching about expressing "sexuality."

Sure it is by your community's own admission of the fundamental need to recruit.

Unless you you're OK with the implication that anything that teaches about marriage (EVERY Disney Princess movie...?!) is actually "teaching about the expression of sexuality"...?

The fact that it diverges from the normative male/female role model causes any notion of homosexual marriage to teach about the expression of sexuality.

[mercyngrace]

Personally I think everyone is naturally born gay. If you look at the behavior of typical small boys, they think girls are icky. They want nothing to do with them. Every young boy knows that girls have the cooties. But society is so bent on indoctrination them in the heterosexual agenda that it causes them to become straight. They hear this straight agenda in their schools, churches and the public square. The straight agenda is on every TV show and Hollywood glamorizes it in the movies. Entire movies are made pushing heterosexuality on our youth.. The straight agenda is in their text books in our public schools from the age of 5 and taught directly in the classrooms on a regular basis.

It is amazing to me that through all of this straight indoctrination agenda that any kid survives to remain gay when they grow up. Americans need to start standing up against this radical right wing conspiricy shoved down our throats by the right wing media. If we don't make a stand against this radical ideology, our youth will be lost forever.

Well, on behalf of all social engineers, I confess to pushing the hetero agenda. You must understand however, we were willing to give an all-homosexual society a chance. Unfortunately, in test after test, our pilot programs never got past the first generation.

[california boy]

Sure it is by your community's own admission of the fundamental need to recruit.

I am going to ask a CFR on your statement on this. I have to say, I have NEVER hear someone who is gay talk about the need to recruit. This is TOTALLY a right wing fear tacit that has been used for decades. You can't "recruit" someone to be gay. That concept is laughable. I have yet to hear any reports where a gay therapist was using electrical shock therapy to "make someone gay" or telling someone that if they pray enough they can become gay.

What is fought for is tolerance and respect for someone who chooses to acknowledge his sexual orientation and to be allowed to live in this country equally under its laws. The message that it is ok to be gay is far different than your "fundamental need to recruit" statement.

You wonder why the polls are sharply turning against your views on how to treat gays?? It is simply this. As prejudice decreases, people see through the lies. Unsubstantiated statements fall by the wayside. Justice prevails. Religious dogma is relegated to the churches and not the government. It is why the religious right will not be able to continue to bend the laws of this country towards their dogma. And as we are also seeing, mainstream Christian churches are embracing a gospel of love and inclusiveness for all of the followers of Christ. (a recent example of this)Yeah I get the Mormon church does not believe in these attitudes. History repeats itself.

[california boy]

Well, on behalf of all social engineers, I confess to pushing the hetero agenda. You must understand however, we were willing to give an all-homosexual society a chance. Unfortunately, in test after test, our pilot programs never got past the first generation.

LOL. Now that is funny.

[TAO]

I understand what you're saying, but this ONE belief is not all there is to religion, and I don't see how marginalizing that one belief, will reduce the role of religion in society, as a whole.

We can't just continue to publicly discriminate against people, because of religious belief, when these people in, actuality, are doing nothing to harm anyone....just trying to live their lives and raise their children, like everyone else.

Libs... neither is the one belief of mairrage all there is to homosexuality. So now we have two values butting heads, I guess you could say =/.

Let me show you an example of how it could effect religion though...

Have you ever considered, how the 'promotion of science' in schools has increased the number of atheists? Why did it do that? Because it makes it harder to believe in miracles. Miracles are an important part of religion, I think. Most religions would say that, I would hope.

Now, we have this... and then we have pieces of the Bible in certain sections conflicting with the opinion of those who support it. We also have many church's including ours, who have come out against it. Now, if they are forced to change their opinion, why would people want to trust them? No, it's hard having faith in something that isn't stable, through and through. It's hard. One might say the church has done this in the past... but it doesn't look that way to me - to me, it looks like temporary delays and such. But I cannot see a way for the church to validly change it's opinion on this issue, especially with Proclimation to the Family... which was signed by the prophet and all of the apostles. Now, one could say it isn't doctrine, but it isn't like past issues, where not everybody signed it, in this case, the leadership of the church agreed and promoted this path.

You are right, there are probably some who don't want to harm us - but they are dictated by the activists, who do want to rid us of our ideals. I remember a thread a few weeks ago about a movie being taught in classrooms relating to telling kids to accept homosexuality as normal - and parents weren't allowed to prevent their kids from seeing the video - the video was counted as preventing discrimination.

So, the sad things is, when it comes down to it, 'it isn't going to happen' won't do it anymore. It will happen. Unless we do something to stop it. We can't be complacent anymore, because they will take our ideals away from us, one by one, war of attrition, a little at a time. We must stop this now, or there won't be anything left to stand on.

I worry, lest our ideals are controlled by the schools we attend. People, even in little groups, have long arms, and effect many things. In a way, it's small minorities that are gaining power, and that isn't always a bad thing, but when they misuse it... it causes problems that we all must worry about.

Understand, I've never wanted people to be bullied, or for people to suicide. But really, all this is is another form of bullying - social bullying. Really, politics is that - majorly important adults bullying each other with words. And then, certain organizations get the flak from it and socially 'suicide' and cease to exist. These bullying issues that have been going on, are supposed to get rid of bullying. But all they are doing is encouraging it - on someone else. It's the sad world of politics =(.

I will do my best to act Christ like on this issue, but it saddens me really to see people going after each other with such hate and malice. I mean... is it not supposed to be 'I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' or something like that? Where did that value go? I hate the contention that goes on, I hate it with a passion. Both sides of it. =(

And I am flawed myself.

Silent Wishes,

TAO