GAY TRUTH

If there was one thing we could all agree on, you would think it would be this: minors should be protected from sexually aggressive adults.   Yet, with a nod to “equality” under the law for the gay community, the California Assembly has voted to lessen the potential penalty for 24-year-olds who have sex with children as young as 14.  Shockingly – or should I say, revoltingly – this is one of two, similar bills that have just been passed by these legislators. As explained by Greg Burt of the California Family Council,  “The California legislature finished it’s 2020 session on Monday by passing a controversial bill that reduces the penalties on some adults who have consensual sex with minors as young as 14 years of age.” Why would they want to potentially reduce these penalties?  I understand that sexual acts are allegedly “consensual” and that the difference in age can be no more than 10 years. And I understand that some people end up having to register as sex offenders

Studies show that children raised by homosexuals have significantly more social and mental-health problems than children raised by a mom and a dad. An Israeli film director has pointed out that children have become a “status symbol” for homosexual men, calling attention to the additional stress on same-sex couples to indulge in the often costly enterprise of obtaining genetically-linked kids through surrogacy, out of reach for most.   “Children have in a way become a status symbol among many gay men,” director Yuval Hadadi, whose most recent film, “15 Years,” examines the breakdown of an affluent gay couple’s relationship after one partner decides to become a father.  “They signify a certain level of time, money, and ambition,” observed Hadadi, resources that have often been available only to wealthy, A-list gays and lesbians.  Studies by sociologist Mark Regnerus have found that children raised by homosexuals have significantly more social and mental-health problems tha

Some see the David and Jonathan story and the Ruth and Naomi story as positive examples of homosexual love within Scripture. 1. David and Jonathan . Some of the incidents in the David and Jonathan narrative might lead one to believe that the two were homosexual lovers. For instance, David and Jonathan embrace, weep together and kiss each other (1 Sam 20:41-42), they make a covenant of friendship (1 Sam 18:1; 20:8, 16-17, 42; 23:18) and express their love for each other in strong terms (1 Sam 18:3; 19:1; 20:17). At Jonathan’s death, David writes a passionate lament for Saul and Jonathan in which he articulates his love for Jonathan: “I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women” (2 Sam 1:26). While the relationship between David and Jonathan could be construed to be homosexual, there are factors that suggest otherwise. Embracing, weeping together and kissing were (and still are) standard customs a

The Los Angeles Times calls anal cancer "the next big crisis" for the gay community . According to the American Cancer Society, the future looks grim. The American Cancer Society estimates there will be 8,200 new anal cancer cases in 2017. In the absence of national screening recommendations, more than 50 percent of these individuals will be diagnosed at stage III or IV, when five-year survival is less than 40 percent. This creates a major public health concern. The study shows that anal cancer comes from the sexually transmitted virus HPV. What it doesn't mention is why the gay community is so susceptible to contracting HPV. Perhaps the answer is too politically incorrect for the L.A. Times. NBC reported on a similar study that was done in Hawaii involving women who contracted anal HPV . They danced around the cause in an almost laughable way. It’s not clear exactly how the women contracted anal HPV. Those who developed infections were more likely to be young

There exists today a massive crisis within the “gay” community that is a direct result of the intense trauma, particularly in “gay” men, experienced during the height of AIDS epidemic. The current rather conservative swerve towards embracing, what queer theorists used to call “heterocentric norms,” by a small subsect of the “gay” community in their rush towards same-sex marriage, parenthood, and social responsibility, I argue is not a sign of progress, but of intense panic. For those of us , like myself, who lived through the 1980s and 90s, subconsciously, back then we all realized the “gay” experiment had failed us. I first saw this in the often myopic vision of ACT-UP and their repeatedly ugly and unfounded accusations against those who initially had very little to do with the rise of the AIDS epidemic. This hysteria of blame reached a violent apogee when  a 1989 demonstration  went out of control at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City : a group of protestors entered t

Is the procreative impossibility of homosexual activity the same as heterosexuals being biologically infertile?  Stetson University law professor Joseph Morrissey is suing for a tax deduction of $36,538 for in vitro fertilization treatments and the cost of a surrogate to carry twin boys for himself and his male partner. In denying Morrissey's claim, the IRS explained that for tax deductions, the medical services must be provided to the taxpayer, his spouse, or his dependent. Therefore, a surrogate does not qualify, and neither does IVF for someone other than the filer, his spouse, or his dependent. What Morrissey is focusing on, however, is the words of the IRS agent who turned down his IVF tax deduction. The IRS agent noted that Morrissey's sexual orientation is a "choice." Morrissey's lawsuit states, "Despite the IRS's backward and archaic thinking, plaintiff is not homosexual by 'choice.'" Morrissey claims that the pro