The superintendent of a Wisconsin public school district has apologized after high school students were shown a video that promotes same-sex marriage.
The 16-minute video, "Kids React to Gay Marriage," recorded men and women proposing to members of the same sex at a Home Depot, and other settings as music blared and people danced. It then went on to ask comments of very young children about the highly complex and difficult issue of Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage.
I warn you – you will not be any smarter for having watched this video, though you may want to throw something at your screen.
Notice some things in this video. Some of the kids at first seem fine with this, while others have a look of disgust on their face.
Then notice the comments – ‘They were born that way’. This is what kids are being taught; even though study after study has not yet found conclusive scientific evidence that gay people are born that way.
The search for the ‘Gay Gene’ continues. In early 2014 there was a new discovery that an area on the X chromosome – which men inherit from their mothers -- known as Xq28 has some impact on sexual orientation. Another stretch of DNA chromosome 8 also affects male sexual behavior, they said. That being said, what this discovery points to are 'Chromosome Abnormalities' and not a ‘Gay Gene’.
The outcomes of Chromosome Abnormalities include but are not limited to Down syndrome, which is well known; but there are many you may have not even heard of. Such as:
1. Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome
2. Jacobsen Syndrome
3. Angelman syndrome
4. Turner syndrome
5. 22q11.2 deletion syndrome
6. Triple X Syndrome
7. Williams Syndrome
8. Cri du Chat Syndrome
9. Trisomy 13/Patau syndrome
10. Trisomy 18/Edwards syndrome
11. Cat eye syndrome
12. Trisomy 16
13. Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease
Other Genetic Syndromes Caused by Chromosome Abnormalities
So – all of these Chromosome Abnormalities are listed, and described by the Medical Community as ‘Birth Defects’ – but if we find a ‘Chromosome Abnormality’ that may contribute to homosexuality – we are not allowed to call it a birth defect; we are supposed to call it “normal”.
Why would pro-homosexual or pro-same-sex marriage folks continue to tell kids that gay people are born that way, when in fact all of the science unearthed thus far supports the antithesis of this conclusion? Rhetorical question - Because they cannot support their position with facts and science – they can only rely on propaganda like this video in order to brainwash the next generation.
At around minute 6:28, the video graphic says that ‘reparative therapy (for gay people) is currently only favored by religious groups. This is an outright lie – there are many counseling practices and organizations who support and offer such therapy services; whose organizations, doctors and counselors have no religious affiliation. Just more lies and propaganda in order to ensure no opposition while they brainwash the young.
Notice that at no time in this video do the producers offer any reputable sources for their assertions. They also in the production and showing of this video to school children – NEVER – offer any input or details from any opposing viewpoint. The other side of the argument is completely left out. With a subject as controversial as homosexuality and same-sex marriage – leaving out the other side of the issue has to be by design. Such is usually the case when propaganda is false, can easily be refuted - but is designed in order to totally deceive its target audience; which in this case is SCHOOL CHILDREN! (Not just the children in the video, but the school kids who are being forced to watch this propaganda in their neighborhood public schools).
Between minutes 7 & 8 in the video, they now have the CHILDREN regurgitation the same old tired arguments. Such as ‘what about love and freedom’ – of course the fact that gay people are free in this country to love one another and commit to each other is not touched on. What is glaringly missing? They never discuss any of the philosophical or cultural questions such as ‘What is marriage really about', or ‘do same-sex relationships have the same outcomes as heterosexual relationships’; or 'are there any negative individual or societal effects on public health, welfare and economics as a result of normalizing same-sex relationships'? All of these are pretty important questions are they not? We now have many studies in place from other countries that have already legalized same-sex marriage. These studies all show that the outcomes are not beneficial, but are in fact harmful. But God forbid they share that information with these young and impressionable children!
At one point the graphics at the bottom of the video talks about other countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, they even mention that ‘Only 14 states in the US allow same-sex marriage’ – to which a couple of these children are appalled. This is expected when they are being bombarded with propaganda that has no balance of opinions on the issue, or when no other facts, research or ideas of opposition are presented.
How about the idea that along with our freedoms of choice also comes a share of consequences and responsibilities? At one point a young student says, “Love is a freedom, and they are totally taking that away”. Uhh – no their not. No one can or is trying to take away the freedom of one person to love another; same-sex or otherwise. Nobody is being persecuted, locked-up, or forced to ‘not’ love another; or forced to abandon their same-sex partner. What an absurd assertion - that does not happen in freedom-loving America!
As is typical of the pro-homosexual movement; they talk a lot about freedoms, but somehow almost never talk about any level of responsibilities or consequences that come from exercising our freedoms or making some bad choices.
They then go on to talk about how it used to be illegal for a black person to marry a white person; and that this issues is the same thing. Uhh – no its not. Two people of the opposite sex who happen to be of different ethnicity has nothing to do with the subject of same-sex marriage; they cannot even be compared – outside of the word 'marriage' - the two subjects have nothing to do with each other.
At another point, they reference how the Supreme Court is upholding same-sex marriage decisions. Well – the Supreme Court doesn’t always get it right. The court used to declare that slavery was constitutional. They currently declare abortion as constitutional, even though we know that from the moment of conception, it is a unique human life inside the womb.The court and it's judges are not perfect or free from error.
At another point, a boy that seems to be about 5 year’s old expresses that he does not think gay marriage is a good idea. The interviewer (a GROWN-UP that is off camera), asked the boy, “do you know why you don’t like it”; to which the little boy replies “No”. Isn’t that great?! Let’s put a 5 or 6 year old on camera, who is not mature or educated enough on the subject of same-sex marriage and use them as a tool or a prop to support the pro-homosexual movement. Many educated adults have trouble articulating why they don’t agree with same-sex marriage. That is so unfair to this little boy – it just infuriates me!
Later in the video – the same little boy is asked… “Why does it matter to you so much about who you love or who you marry?” – To which the boy says, “because gay is bad for you”. Newsflash – that is actually a true statement that is now backed-up by hundreds of studies worldwide. But the producers of this video NEVER share or reference any of these inconvenient facts. Go Figure! (They are referenced in spades at the bottom of this page. I don't propagandize, I educate and back it up with actual facts).
Then the host goes on and tells some of the kids… “In some places of the world, you can be jailed or even put to death for being gay”. To which one teenage boy comments – “Nobody has a valid reason to hate gays”. Well that is true, hatred is never reasonable or good. But that is not the question or subject that is being propagandized in this video. The questions is… why isn’t homosexuality or same-sex marriage normal? Is it normal or is it abnormal? That not’s hatred… they are legitimate questions that deserves an intelligent answer. Intelligent answers that are now available that the makers of this video so conveniently left out! No... instead, they simply lead these young people to an incorrect idea that dissent or disagreement is somehow 'hatred'. Have they no shame?!
They then make an attempt to touch on some of the reasons as to why some oppose same-sex marriage or homosexuality in general. They really only touch the ‘Titles’ of these topics and do not get into anything of substance on the matter. How convenient!
Then they predictably steer the conversation toward religion. Well, certainly people have their religious beliefs. That being said; thorough cases and arguments in opposition of same-sex marriage and in favor of traditional marriage have been made that have nothing to do with religion nor do they speak about or reference any scriptures or teaching of any religions; Christian or otherwise. This is the same old trick of blaming religion. They use attacks on or critisims of religion as a diversion in order to avoid the basic questions they don't like the answers too. Take religion or scripture completely out of the conversation and approach the subject only from scientific or natural terms; we can answer the question... “Is homosexuality or same-sex marriage the natural state of things, is it normal or is it abnormal?… Is it beneficial or harmful? None these question need be answered in religious terms in order to come to a conclusion that it is not a good idea to normalize same-sex marriage.
Then they have a little girl comparing Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement to the issues of the same-sex marriage movement. Again – this is not a fair comparison, and is downright insulting to those folks who fought for minority civil rights. Again, a person is born black, white, Hispanic or otherwise, which has now been PROVEN through genetic research and science. But - there is no conclusive scientific evidence that a person is born gay. In fact, even the most recent study of Chromosome Abnormality that I referred to above; the doctor in that study himself said the abnormality… "It is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved." This means there is no proof that a person is born gay.
Homosexuals understandably want their relationships to have equal social status with those of heterosexuals, and they see the law as their weapon to force that acceptance on the public. Homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile believes that legalized same-sex marriage is “a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea of change in how society views and treats us.” (Michelangelo Signorile)
Andrew Sullivan agrees. He writes, “If nothing else were done at all and gay marriage were legalized, 90 percent of the political work necessary to achieve gay and lesbian equality will have been achieved. It’s ultimately the only reform that matters.” (Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal)
By their own admission, the main reason homosexuals want the government involved is to force acceptance of homosexuality on the public. I apologize for the repetition, but I cannot emphasize this enough. They want to change the law because they know that’s the way to change cultural attitudes about their behavior. In other words, state sanction will lead to social sanction. The approval by law will lead to approval of homosexuality. Since many activists consider homosexual behavior their "identity", any approval of homosexuality means approval of them as people. This fails to recognize that we do recognize them as people, we just don't approve of their behavior. Parents often disapprove of the behavior of their children; wives sometimes disapprove the behavior of their husbands, etc. Yet - we still recognize our children and our spouse as people. We do not see their sexuality as their identity. Many in the LBGT community want to force society into validating their behavior by using the force of law and government. That is what this is about. It’s not really about marriage, but the validation legally recognized same-sex marriage will bring them; perceived or otherwise.
But government doesn’t exist to validate the desires of its citizens when such validation would harm others or society. This is why government does not validate most behavior; and particularly those that are destructive. For example, nearly everyone agrees that pedophilia is bad behavior and destructive. In fact, our society considers these so very destructive that we expect government to protect children from such harm. Well, there are hundreds of reputable and reliable studies that support the position that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are also harmful. So contrary to the idea that government exists to validate the desires of its citizens or their behaviors— the main purpose of government is to protect its citizens from harm.
The Bottom-line is; gay and lesbian couples ARE free in this nation to live together and even pledge themselves to each other for the remainder of their lives. There are even churches and ministers that will perform marriage ceremonies for them. We have laws that protect them from being harassed, harmed and violated by any hate filled or bigoted people; and they should have those protections. Hatred and the harming of others should never be tolerated in America or any other society. That being said, intelligent, reasonable and defensible disagreement is NOT hatred or intolerance - no matter how often they say it is, or how often they use the terms 'homophobic or bigot'.
However, the preponderance of evidence; when taken in its totality - clearly shows homosexuality produces harm that should be avoided. Unfortunately, virtually NONE of these facts, studies and evidence has been shared with the children in the video above. VIRTUALLY NONE!
How about this for a new law – perhaps we should make it ILLEGAL for any organization or group of people to use children as a pawn or a prop in order push an agenda, or produce propaganda? Perhaps we should wait until we’ve taken the time to present ALL OF THE FACTS to children before we ask them what they think or feel about such a delicate and complex subject.
The makers of this one-sided piece of propaganda are nothing short of disgusting!
Just to be sure that no one can accuse me of exaggerating just how many study’s and how much empirical evidence is out there that makes the case to support traditional marriage and NOT validate same-sex marriage – the evidence that is not touched on - not EVEN ONCE in this video… Here are six pages of them!
References, Links & Resources
Does A ‘Gay Gene’ Exist? New Study Says ‘Xq28’ May Influence Male Sexual Orientation
Whoops not enough after students shown homosexual propaganda
Genetic Syndromes Caused by Chromosome Abnormalities
Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT Magazine, May 1996, pg. 30.
Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal, (USA, Vintage Books, 1996), pg. 185.
Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia,” Weekly Standard, February 2, 2004,
Kurtz, “Slipping Toward Scandinavia.” Kurtz responds to his critics in, “Smoking Gun:
The Netherlands shows the effect of Same-sex Marriage,” in National Review Online, June 2,
2006. Available here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/217803/smoking-gun/stanley-kurtz
Only 37 percent of people from countries with same-sex marriage think they should marry if they want children while 60 percent of people from countries without same-sex marriage think so. The same attitude holds true with regard to cohabitation: 83 percent think it’s acceptable in same-sex marriage countries, but only 49 percent think so elsewhere. See David Blankenhorn, The Future of Marriage, (New York, Encounter Books), 2007, pg. 233.
See the 2008 report titled “The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing” at
Health Facts of Homosexual Activity
Even if we ignore the cultural issue of procreation or any arguments based on religious grounds, the evidence shows that homosexual unions are medically inferior to man-woman unions.
a. Results in numerous health problems to those who practice it, including increases in AIDS, other STDs, colon and rectal cancer, and hepatitis. According to the Center for Disease Control, more than 82 percent of all known sexually-transmitted AIDS cases in 2006 were the result of male-to-male sexual contact. Moreover, gay and bisexual men account for more than 60 percent of all syphilis cases.21
b. Shortens the life span of homosexuals, probably by eight to twenty years (see note 22 for data on homosexual life span studies, some of which are controversial).22 Smoking, on average, reduces life span by seven years. Since we discourage smoking, why are we thinking of endorsing homosexuality?
21 The actual AIDS figure is probably higher than 82 percent because nearly all of the supposedly heterosexually-transmitted cases have a “risk factor not specified.” Since homosexual contact is one of the most efficient ways of transmitting the disease, many of those not specified cases probably originated with homosexual contact. See Center for Disease Control, Cases of HIV infection and AIDS in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2006 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, Volume 17, April 2008. See Table 17: Reported AIDS cases, by age category, transmission category, and sex, 2006 and cumulative—United States and dependent areas. Available online at:
According to the Centers for Disease Control, gay and bisexual men account for the vast majority of syphilis cases (more than 60 percent in 2005). See also William Dunham, “Syphilis rise in U.S. gay, bisexual men causes worry,” Reuters, May 4, 2007.
Posted online at http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2007-05-04T170053Z_01_N04373052_RTRUKOC_0_US-SYPHILIS-USA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22.
22 John R. Diggs, Jr. M.D, “The Health Risks of Gay Sex,” Corporate Resource Council, 2002. Available on-line at http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org/white_papers/Health_Risks.pdf.
R.S. Hogg, S.A. Strathdee, K.J. Craib, M.V. O’Shaughnessy, J.S. Montaner, and M.T. Schechter “Modeling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men,” International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 26, 657-661.
Available online at http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/3/657
Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Books, 1996), 54, 69. For a recent study on HIV soaring among men having sex with teenage boys, see
More controversial studies have been conducted by Dr. Paul Cameron
Some researchers and many homosexual activists question the methodology of Dr. Cameron’s life span studies which found that the median age of death for male homosexuals is in the forties and lesbians in the fifties. A summary and discussion of Cameron’s research can be found in “Only the gay die young? An exchange between Warren Throckmorton, Morten.
c. Spreads disease to innocent people who never engage in homosexual sex. A prominent example is Ryan White, the teenage boy who died of AIDS after a blood transfusion. There are thousands of Ryan Whites—according to the CDC, there are nearly ten thousand known cases of innocent people in the United States who have contracted AIDS the same way, including 160 in 2005 and 131 in 2006 (this despite improvements in blood screening).23 Moreover, there are thousands of innocent heterosexuals (many are spouses) who have contracted STDs via sexual contact with bisexuals.
23 Center for Disease Control, Cases of HIV infection and AIDS in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2005 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, Volume 17, Revised Edition, June 2007. See Table 17: Reported AIDS cases, by age category, transmission category, and sex, 2005 and cumulative— United States and dependent areas.
Available online at http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/reports/2005report/table17.htm
for 2006 numbers.
Costs Americans millions in higher health insurance premiums because increased health costs from homosexual behavior are reflected in those premiums. In fact, the homosexual lobby has induced some states to prevent insurers from asking potential consumers any medical questions, including if they are HIV positive! As a result, every consumer is paying a higher premium because insurance companies are prevented from identifying clients who engage in high-risk sexual behavior.
The bottom line is that homosexual behavior is unhealthy. All sexual behaviors are not equally beneficial, and some of them can have negative public consequences. Innocent people can and do get hurt. Due to the devastating health effects of male homosexuality, most of the research into gay health issues has been concentrated on homosexual men. However, the research that has been conducted with respect to lesbians does not yield good news. Lesbians experience many more health problems than heterosexual women.
Even the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association admits the following about lesbian women:
Lesbians have the richest concentration of risk;
Factors for breast cancer than any subset of women in the world.
They have higher risks for cervical cancers.
They are more likely to be obese.
They use more tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.
A study of over 1,400 lesbians found the following:
Lesbians experience higher rates of bacterial vaginosis and hepatitis C.
They have more than twice the number of male partners than heterosexual women (only 7 percent who identify themselves as lesbians never have sex with men).
They are 4.5 times more likely to have fifty or more male sexual partners in a lifetime.
They are three to four times more likely to have sex with men who are at high risk for HIV— homosexuals, bisexuals, and IV drug users.
Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, “Ten Things Lesbians Should Discuss With Their Health Care Provider,” http://www.glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=691
They are six times more likely to abuse drugs intravenously.25
Other studies also confirm lesbian health problems.26
Many homosexual activists get angry when you cite these health facts. But why would anyone get angry over facts?
As Augustine said, we love the truth when it enlightens us, but we hate it when it convicts us.
However, other homosexual activists acknowledge negative health effects and then use them as a reason to support their cause. This “conservative” case for same-sex marriage suggests that homosexual monogamy, encouraged by government-backed same-sex marriage, would alleviate these health problems. Andrew Sullivan writes, “A law institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend. It would also, in the wake of AIDS, qualify as a genuine public health measure.”27
Unfortunately, health problems and life span are not likely to improve significantly in so-called committed” homosexual relationships. Why not? There are at least four reasons. First, monogamy is not the main issue—homosexual behavior is. Homosexual acts are inherently unhealthy, not just multiple-partner homosexual acts. This is especially true of male homosexuality. Does anyone really believe that it is natural and healthy to insert the penis into the rectum—the organ whose sole purpose is to expel poisons from the body? The rectum is a one-way street. It’s a sewer. It was designed that way. Labeling its abuse as an act of “love” will not change that fact.
The standard homosexual response to this is, “It’s natural for me because I desire to do it.” I don’t mean “natural” in the sense of desire, but “natural” in the sense of design. Human beings have all kinds of “natural” desires to do things that are physically destructive (e.g. smoking, getting drunk, violence, etc.), and those things often feel good. But we don’t excuse those behaviors because they come “naturally.” The human body was not designed for anal intercourse. Such an act violates
For a summary of lesbian health problems, see John R. Diggs, Jr. M.D, “The Health Risks of Gay Sex,” Corporate Resource Council, 2002, pgs. 5-6.
The natural design, and having a desire to engage in it does not change the fact that it is unnatural and physically destructive. Second, coupled homosexuals tend to practice more anal intercourse and more anal-oral sex than those without a steady partner. They also forego safer-sex practices because they are “in love.”28 In other words, coupled homosexuals tend to engage in more risky sexual contact than their single counterparts. So while married men improve their health and life span by being faithful to their wives, there is no comparable benefit in homosexual couples.
Third, if AIDS will not break promiscuity in homosexuals, it is unlikely government-backed marriage will. As AIDS is falling among heterosexuals, it is rising among homosexual men.
Finally, even if monogamy could reduce health problems, monogamy is the exception rather than the rule among homosexuals. The average number of sexual partners in a lifetime for a heterosexual is four, but for a homosexual it is fifty. The vast Sex in America survey published by the University of Chicago found monogamy among heterosexuals to be 83 percent but less than 2 percent for homosexuals.
Another survey had more moderate results, but still found infidelity in about 62 percent of gay couples. That led researchers in the Journal of Family Psychology to write, “The practice of sexual non-monogamy among some gay couples is one variable that differentiates gay and heterosexual couples.”
Why is monogamy much more common between men and women? Could it be because men and women are designed for one another and are therefore complementary? Think about it. One of the least-mentioned aspects of this debate is how men and women complement one another. Each sex balances and moderates the other by providing what’s lacking in the other.
David Dunlap, “In Age of AIDS, Love and Hope Can Lead to Risk,” New York Times, July 27, 1996.
Mike Stobbe, “CDC understated number of new HIV infections in US,” Reuters, August 2,2008.
Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), the data from which Dr. Satinover draws these figures is the Sex in America survey published by researchers from the University of Chicago in 1994.
Quoted in Warren Throckmorton, Ph.D., “Chris Matthews’ Hard Sell: Pay attention to the common Assumptions about Gay Marriage,” online at http://www.pfm.org/AM/Templatecfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=13210
NBC News - See Maggie Gallagher and Joshua Baker, “Demand for Same-Sex Marriage: Evidence from the United States, Canada, and Europe,” Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, April 26, 2006. Posted online at http://www.marriagedebate.com
See marital status and longevity in the United States population, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16905719
Andrew Sullivan, “Here Comes the Groom: A Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” posted online at http://www.andrewsullivan.com/homosexuality.php - (This one is quite hilarious because he is making a case ‘for gay marriage’ but all of the sources he references show how dangerous homosexual sex is).
According to the Centers for Disease Control, gay and bisexual men account for the vast majority of syphilis cases (more than 60 percent in the last decade). See also William Dunham, “Syphilis rise in U.S. gay, bisexual men causes worry,” Reuters, May 4, 2007. Posted online at:
See Literature Review of the Economic Impact of Homophobia on Canada (see http://www.lgbthealth.net/downloads/research/Human_Impact_of_Homophobia.pdf
The Problem of Pedophilia, National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality,
September 21, 2004, available online at http://www.narth.com/docs/pedophNEW.html
Judith Stacey, In the Name of the Family, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1997), pgs. 123-124
How about doctors who are experts in human sexuality – is that a ‘RIGHTWING’ source?
See Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 5, October 2003, pp. 403-
417. For a summary of the findings see Roy Waller and Linda A. Nicolosi, Spitzer Study Published:
Evidence Found for Effectiveness of Reorientation Therapy, National Association for Research &
Therapy of Homosexuality, September 21, 2004, available online at http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html
Are Same-Sex Couples Just Like You?
A study of two generations of British couples (one born 1958, the other 1970) in same-sex cohabiting, opposite-sex cohabiting and opposite-sex marriage relationships found the same-sex relationships dramatically more likely to break up than the opposite-sex cohabiting and married relationships. The probabilities of the various relationships surviving to the 4 and 8 year anniversaries are dramatic (p. 981):