Small numbers -- but very vocal

by David E. Smith, Illinois Family Institute

Despite the widely circulated myth that 8-10 percent (or even more) of our nation's population is homosexual, a new study by New York's Hunter College has determined that less than 3 percent of Americans older than 18 identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual.

Ironically, the poll was funded by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nation's leading homosexual activist organization in the country (with an annual budget of +$30 million).

Just last week, this small but vocal group of homosexual activists bullied the American Psychiatric Association (APA) into cancelling a symposium on homosexuality and faith. The event would have featured a wide spectrum of viewpoints -- including those of conservatives --on "reparative therapy."

But homosexual activists could not tolerate the ex-gay message -- they did not want this truth to be heard or legitimized, so they pushed the APA hard to cancel, despite the fact that it was organized by one of its own. David Scasta, a former APA president, said that his goal was to have a "balanced discussion about religion's role in therapy." "We wanted to talk rationally... but the external forces made it into a divisive debate it never intended to be."

In other news, rioting lesbians stormed an address being given by "Born Gay Hoax" author Ryan Sorba at Smith College, physically taking over the stage and shutting down his speech entirely. They shouted, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it!" So much for tolerance, freedom of speech, and respect for differences. Said Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth points out:

Communists and fascists censor advocates of democratic freedom and independent religion. Darwinists expel critics of evolution from the academy. Officially pro-homosexual governments in Britain, Canada and other countries persecute Christians who voice their Biblical belief that homosexuality is a changeable sin. And radical homosexualists here in the USA trample on the rights of those who dare question the tenets of their activist movement, which is all of 100-plus years old (German “sexologist” Magnus Hirschfeld).

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council in Washington D.C. is absolutely correct when he suggest that "values voters could stand to learn a few things from the peaceable side of [homosexual activism] as we try to transform the culture. Imagine the influence Christians could have if we all resolved to engage the public square and speak the truth!"

Sources:

Poll Shows Less Than 3 Percent of Americans are Gay (CitizenLink.com)

Lesbians riot at Smith College speech (WorldNetDaily.com)

Comments

[dan l]

How does a protest constitute censorship that would be best compared to "communists and fascists"?

Tangent: Your boy The Pete also claims that protesting events like this "violates first amendment rights". Heh.

Being drowned out by a protest /= censorship, kids.

[Peter LaBarbera]

To 'The Dan,' if you're having a hard time understanding how the Left is against free speech in this nation, then perhaps you are beyond hope. Do the words "speech codes" mean anything to you? Oops, I see: you are a part of the Neo Totalitarian Left! Ryan Sorba was a scheduled speaker at a college that provides abundant and multifarious opportunities for students to hear left-wing speakers, be they pro-gay, pro-radical-feminist, pro-Marxist, etc. So why did they need to shut Sorba down? Have you seen the tape? There were people there to HEAR Ryan speak. What about their rights, Dan? Of course the larger question is: what are you and your censorious friends on the Left afraid of? Why do you feel the need to drown out the other side's speech? I'm sure glad that we have a First Amendment and not some State Speech Agency with the likes of "MoveOnAndShutUp" bloggers deciding which speech can and which cannot be heard.

[dan l]

LOL. Your lack of understanding of the concept of "rights" is remarkable.

Peter, you _do_ realize that a "speech code" or the "neutralization of first amendment rights" implies that some sort of law or rule was created to preclude one from speaking their mind, right? And, since you're a smart guy, you also understand that being spoken over, however rude and/or impolite, hardly represents the establishment of a law, right?

Peter, while you're here I've got a question for you. You spend a great deal of time proclaiming the dangers of the "powerful" "homosexual agenda" in terms of the danger that it presents to so called "traditional marriage" and "religious freedom".

Out of curiosity, how does what you believe to be 3% of the population present massive danger in a majority rules country?

Side note: I always find it amusing how the most vocal side of the right wing scream "st00p1d lib-ruhl" every time somebody doesn't agree with Christian values being made law. In fact, I vote republican far more often than not.

[dan l]

Meanwhile: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=63590

BamBam Barber is out there asking for censorship.

Amazing.

[Peter LaBarbera]

Dan, you didn't answer my question: what is it that the Left is afraid of in shouting down opposing speakers? And if you want "law" and government censorship, look to Canada and Great Britain, where a pro-gay orthodoxy IS criminalizing speech critical of homosexuality. Stop with the technicalities and tell us now: do you oppose all attempts -- thru government or private speech thugs like the Smith lesbians -- to shut down opponents' speech?

PS. You're in no place to laugh at Christians. It's the Left that does the most name-calling and silly ad hominem attacks (calling Bush "Hitler"), etc. They hate, smear and squelch speech they dislike in the name of fighting hate and intolerance. LOL

[anonymous]

If Drs. Mohler and Throckmorton really wanted to have this debate, and if as they say they are not afraid of open debate, why don't they just host it themselves?

There certainly must be enough room for this panel to speak at the Baptist Theological Seminary, or at the Focus on the Family headquarters, or perhaps at a Love Won Out conference?

[anonymous]

If Drs. Mohler and Throckmorton really wanted to have this debate, and if as they say they are not afraid of open debate, why don't they just host it themselves?

There certainly must be enough room for this panel to speak at the Baptist Theological Seminary, or at the Focus on the Family headquarters, or perhaps at a Love Won Out conference?

[dan l]

-----
what is it that the Left is afraid of in shouting down opposing speakers?
-----

I think they probably protest for much the same reasons you hold your protests.

-----
And if you want "law" and government censorship, look to Canada and Great Britain, where a pro-gay orthodoxy IS criminalizing speech critical of homosexuality.
-----

Frankly, Peter, I don't care about Canada or Great Britain. I don't live there. I don't want to live there. It's their backyard. Let them do what they do.

------
do you oppose all attempts -- thru government or private speech thugs like the Smith lesbians -- to shut down opponents' speech?
------

Cute way of phrasing the question. I absolutely, positively oppose any attempts by government to limit freedom of speech. That umm...like a conservative principle and stuff. I would hope you'd agree with that.

As to private groups holding a protest, they're more than welcome to do it. Just the same as _you_ your brand of activism has either the intended or unintended purpose of disrupting other people's events and just as your entire "movement" within the Christian community is intended to disrupt this macro vision you have of "the gay agenda". While I personally wish you would stop, the government has no right to tell you to do so.

Do you oppose the right of special interest groups to hold, organize, and/or contribute to - protests for the purpose of calling attention to, highlighting, and/or providing alternate perspective about a perceived or actual societal problem?

Honestly Peter, when I want a canary in the cave on freedom of speech in this country, I look no further than your web site. The fact that you, above all people, have dedicated your career to demonizing an entire group of people. The fact that you do so, however tasteless, non-factual, absurd, and offensive, is a testament to how strong the first amendment was, is, and will be.

-----
You're in no place to laugh at Christians.
-----
LOL. Arrest me.

[dan l]

So how about it Pete:

How does this whopping "3% of the population" somehow going to cause the downfall of a old as time institution that, I assume, the other 97% of the population has a general interest and/or persuasion to participate in?

[Peter LaBarbera]

Dan, you didn't answer my question: what is it that the Left is afraid of in shouting down opposing speakers? And if you want "law" and government censorship, look to Canada and Great Britain, where a pro-gay orthodoxy IS criminalizing speech critical of homosexuality. Stop with the technicalities and tell us now: do you oppose all attempts -- thru government or private speech thugs like the Smith lesbians -- to shut down opponents' speech?

PS. You're in no place to laugh at Christians. It's the Left that does the most name-calling and silly ad hominem attacks (calling Bush "Hitler"), etc. They hate, smear and squelch speech they dislike in the name of fighting hate and intolerance. LOL

[dan l]

-----
what is it that the Left is afraid of in shouting down opposing speakers?
-----

I think they probably protest for much the same reasons you hold your protests.

-----
And if you want "law" and government censorship, look to Canada and Great Britain, where a pro-gay orthodoxy IS criminalizing speech critical of homosexuality.
-----

Frankly, Peter, I don't care about Canada or Great Britain. I don't live there. I don't want to live there. It's their backyard. Let them do what they do.

------
do you oppose all attempts -- thru government or private speech thugs like the Smith lesbians -- to shut down opponents' speech?
------

Cute way of phrasing the question. I absolutely, positively oppose any attempts by government to limit freedom of speech. That umm...like a conservative principle and stuff. I would hope you'd agree with that.

As to private groups holding a protest, they're more than welcome to do it. Just the same as _you_ your brand of activism has either the intended or unintended purpose of disrupting other people's events and just as your entire "movement" within the Christian community is intended to disrupt this macro vision you have of "the gay agenda". While I personally wish you would stop, the government has no right to tell you to do so.

Do you oppose the right of special interest groups to hold, organize, and/or contribute to - protests for the purpose of calling attention to, highlighting, and/or providing alternate perspective about a perceived or actual societal problem?

Honestly Peter, when I want a canary in the cave on freedom of speech in this country, I look no further than your web site. The fact that you, above all people, have dedicated your career to demonizing an entire group of people. The fact that you do so, however tasteless, non-factual, absurd, and offensive, is a testament to how strong the first amendment was, is, and will be.

-----
You're in no place to laugh at Christians.
-----
LOL. Arrest me.

So how about it Pete:

How does this whopping "3% of the population" somehow going to cause the downfall of a old as time institution that, I assume, the other 97% of the population has a general interest and/or persuasion to participate in?

[MBurns]

Good post and comments, Dave and Pete.

To the other moron--sorry for your loss of cognitive functioning.

[dan l]

And that's the best the socons have?