broke butt mountain

[tanka]

True facts can hurt sensitive souls. snip from a very liberated,Free republic(Vanity) Brokeback Mountain, a Curious Attendance Story
Michael Medved Radio | 1-6-06 | Vanity

Posted on 01/06/2006 3:31:19 PM PST by Balding_Eagle

Did anyone else hear this on the Michael Medved talk radio today?

A man called in, near the end of the hour. He said he had been taken his kids to the theater, and the kids movie they were waiting to see had a very long line. Brokeback Mountain was also showing at that theater. He said he sat near the ticket booth for 35 minutes, as his kids waited in line to buy tickets for their movie.

During that 35 minutes he never heard one person buy a ticket for Brokeback Mountain. However, during that 35 minutes, the “SOLD OUT” sign came on for Brokeback. Out of curiosity, he went in to the Brokeback theater, and only saw 4 people in there. The theater manager refused to comment when the man questioned him.

Is this how all those theaters are getting such high attendance for Brokeback? Imaginary theater goers?

Perhaps other theater goers can investigate for themselves this week



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: BOXOFFICE; BROKEBACKMOUNTAIN; HOLLYWEIRD; HOMOSEXUALAGENDA; MEDVED; PIQUED; PUDDING
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Balding_Eagle
Hey, the lunatic left can piss its money away if it wants to: after all, look at George Soros and the kooks at ACORN, Moveon.org, et al.
The American people will not go to see "Bareback Mount" or whatever its called. They're not interested in "Sodomy on the Range".


2 posted on 01/06/2006 3:33:41 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat ((I am SO glad to no longer be associated To: Balding_Eagle
"only saw 4 people in there"

Were they all men? Sitting REAL close? Maybe they bought the show out for privacy.



To: Recovering_Democrat
The American people will not go to see "Bareback Mount" or whatever its called. They're not interested in "Sodomy on the Range".
I was thinking more "Homo on the Range"....


: Balding_Eagle
Brokeback Mt is a propaganda strategy. Nothing is beyond the left's perverted imagination, including some fool billionaire buying up all the seats so the film can appear to be doing well at the box office.

To: Balding_Eagle
I just visited America briefly over the holidays. I went to the cinema to see "Narnia". As I was standing in line, what was most evident was a large placard for Brokeback Mountain right in between the two sales desks. I had visited this theatre before and had never seen such aggressive marketing for a film.

Something is definitely wrong. This film is being force fed to the public in any manner it can be done.

Regards, Ivan

To: Balding_Eagle
Backside Mounting? What a stupid idea for a film. Homos on the range.
Reminds me of a very old and corny joke...


Did you hear that Elton John's new blushing bride is worried about contracting botulism?
Yes, you see... ahem... he heard that you can get it from old meat in a can.
Oh... sorry, I thought you said butt-u-lism...

G-R-O-A-N-N-N...To: GaltMeister
They're SHEEPHERDERS. NOT cowboys!

To: fishtank
It appears they are using all the tricks in the book in order to not have this movie be a box office dud....first releasing it in carefully selected locations in order to pump up the opening weekend figures. This "sold out" ruse, if true, would be designed to convince the movie-going public that "everyone is seeing it."
I don't plan to see it, but it seems like a gay remake of Same Time Next Year.

Homosexuals will embrace anything, no matter the quality, as long as it portrays gay characters and gay situations in a positive light.

To: Spok
Were they all men?
All sitting in the same chair.
by GaltMeister (“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”)
standard hetrosexual comments.can you dig this,of course you can.

 

[tanka]

I need to address this first,before moving on.It would seem that this list of factual statistics ,widely available to the general public, regarding homosexual sexual practice has earned me..... an irrelevant 800 - demerit points.So my question is this. what part of these statistics do you doubt?Or is it simply that they don't fit your paradigm.I doubt that they were added to encourage open debate.I dont change my opinion for anyone.A case of lets try to shoot the messenger as this does not tally with the agenda.Forget the Hollywood, homosexual version of reality in broke butt............. mountain.These stats paint a true picture, as it really is.I only deal in facts.The more you read, the more you will understand this.now my only disappointment is that when those Gay questionnaire forms were handed in, the police were not around to make the appropriate arrests of the 15% responsible. The standard cry of its all, "equally valid" would have received the response it warrants.Bollocks!

Table 5. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) conducted
a study about homosexual sex practices and found the following:

42% report "fisting" where the hand or arm is inserted into the rectum of their partner.
29% report urinating on or in their partners.
17% report eating and/or rubbing themselves with the feces of their partners.
15% report sex with animals.

 

[tanka]

Moving on.....snip from free republic.No Brokeback in Russia: Moscow Gives Thumbs Down to Gay Pride Parade

Posted on 02/19/2006 9:35

No Brokeback in Russia: Moscow Gives Thumbs Down to Gay Pride Parade

Jim Kouri February 19, 2006

An opinion poll last year showed 43 per cent of Russians believed gay men should be incarcerated. So it's no surprise that plans to stage Russia's first gay pride parade have been vetoed by Moscow's city government on the grounds that the idea has caused "outrage" in society, according to the European press including the British newspaper The Independent.

Representatives from Moscow's Mayor Yuri Luzhkov's said they city government would not even consider an application for a parade, prompting Russia's gay community to threaten legal action in the European Court of Human Rights, even though Russian is not part of the European Union.

Gay and lesbian groups in Russia continue campaigning for permit to stage the country's first gay pride event on Saturday, May 27. That date commemorates the 13th anniversary of the decriminalization of homosexuality in Russia in 1993.

But the gay-lesbian parade coalition's plans have drawn a furious reaction , and it's even been condemned as "suicidal" by other gay activists .

Chief Mufti Talgat Tadzhuddin, a leading cleric in Russia, warned they would stage violent protests if the march went ahead.

"If they come out on to the streets anyway they should be flogged. Any normal person would do that - Muslims and Orthodox Christians alike ...

The cleric said the Koran taught that homosexuals should be killed because their lifestyle spells the extinction of the human race and said that gays had no human rights.

The Russian Orthodox Church has called it "the propaganda of sin". Bishop Daniil of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk yesterday condemned the plans as a "cynical mockery" and likened homosexuality to leprosy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: GAY; HOMOSEXUAL; HOMOSEXUALAGENDA; MOSCOW; NOTHANKS; RUSSIA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(View informed heterosexual replies)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: lizol
Good for Moscow. They have a greater sense of decency than most all American Cities.

To: lizol
The Russians are right about this.

Let gays do what they want, in private.
But do NOT let them parade it around and try to establish the normalcy.


To: lizol
Kinda puts the skid-marks on the poofters little delusional world of a Socialist Utopia.


6 posted on 02/19/2006 9:41:50 AM PST by digger48
To: lizol
An opinion poll last year showed 43 per cent of Russians believed gay men should be incarcerated. Put them in prison. That will keep them from having gay sex.


7 posted on 02/19/2006 9:42:02 AM PST by peyton randolph (As long is it does me no harm, I don't care if one worships Elmer Fudd.)
To: lizol
Commies know gay stuff is wrong, look at the commie goals of the 60's they were and are still trying to to use on America, they list "making gay seem normal and healthy" as one of their goals to destroy America.


8 posted on 02/19/2006 9:44:32 AM PST by Echo Talon
To: lizol
43 per cent of Russians believed gay men should be incarcerated.

Good call. A society needs to be able to protect itself from destabilizing elements that intend to destroy it.

10 posted on 02/19/2006 9:44:49 AM PST by Mulch (tm)
To: peyton randolph
How about castrated?

11 posted on 02/19/2006 9:45:27 AM PST by Echo Talon
"...43 per cent of Russians believed gay men should be incarcerated."
And the other 57 percent believe that they should be shot.


To: zarf
We don't care what you homos do in private. Just don't parade it in our faces and tell us we have to say it's normal.


21 posted on 02/19/2006 10:05:05 AM PST by Bigg Red (Never trust Democrats with national security.)
To: lizol
An opinion poll last year showed 43 per cent of Russians believed gay men should be incarcerated.
Wow! Incredible that the U.S. is morally bankrupt compared to Russia in this regard. I wished half that many Americans believed the same way. That would be enough to get the garbage off our televisions and movie screens.


23 posted on 02/19/2006 10:07:47 AM PST by Clump
To: lizol
At least the Russians have this issue correct.


27 posted on 02/19/2006 10:27:08 AM PST by GBoettner ("Peace" Through superior firepower.)
To: lizol
Homosexuality is banned in the PR china, North Korea, and Cuba. Communists don't like LBGT people. Now try to tell that to a leftie.

To: Mulch(typical homosexual response)
As is your closet homosexuality...anyone that concerned about other people's sex lives to the point where a mere parade has to be banned has something in their closet - usually themselves.


31 posted on 02/19/2006 1:28:08 PM PST by Thunder90 To: garbanzo
Very predictable, friend. Its also rather humorous that people like yourself who vigorously defend sexual perversion of one kind or another will, when cornered in a debate, turn around and accuse their opponent of that same sexual perversion.

To: garbanzo
You defense of sodomy is duly noted.


36 posted on 02/20/2006 6:35:17 AM PST by Mulch (tm)
end of snip from free republic.It pays to know about the issues you talk about.

 

[tanka]

The posts on his thread have raised some valid questions about homosexuality and the true nature of a small clique within the Holly weired film industry.Its been thought provoking .Some of the posts have been humorous and we've had a good laugh between us,and that's the way it should be.You know im right here . Because, well because, ........ im always right.Untill the next thread.Shas chairman: Gays are sick people
YNet ^ | Feb. 22, 2006 | Attila Somfalvi
Yishai has no doubts that a "medication" for the "serious illness" will be a huge hit.

"If there were such a medication, believe me, they would gladly take it. If there was a pill to cure them, they would all go and take it. If it had a medication, they would prefer to fix it, one by one, and take the drug," he concluded.


Later, when asked is as health minister he would work to extend the medicine basket and introduce a special drug for "treating homosexuality," Yishai insisted that "I sincerely hope that they are cured of this thing. A medication for homosexuality has not been invented yet, but I hope it is found."


Posted on 02/22/2006 11:31:04 AM PST by Alouette


In interview to Knesset Channel, Eli Yishai sends homosexuals speedy recovery wishes; says 'if there was a pill to cure them, they would all take it'

end of snip.
Hollywood filmmaker arrested in drag in US prostitution sting (The new James Bond)
AFP ^ | 2/2/06 | AFP


Posted on 02/02/2006 5:59:48 PM PST by BurbankKarl


Hollywood filmmaker Lee Tamahori, who directed the James Bond movie "Die Another Day," has been arrested in a Hollywood prostitution sting while dressed in drag.

Tamahori, 55, was arrested on January 8 when he allegedly sought sex with an undercover policeman while clad in women's clothes, according to a criminal complaint filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

"Mr Tamahori was arrested for soliciting. I can confirm he was dressed in women's clothing at the time of the arrest," Officer Jason Lee of the Los Angeles Police Department said.

Prosecutors confirmed they had filed two misdemeanour charges against the Hollywood filmmaker: agreeing to engage in an act of prostitution and unlawfully loitering on Hollywood's Santa Monica Boulevard.

"He was arrested after approaching an undercover officer who was sitting in his car and offering to perform a sex act," Frank Mateljan of the Los Angeles City Attorney's office.

"The defendant was dressed in drag, loitering on the sidewalk," the spokesman said.

Tamahori also directed last year's action adventure "XXX: State of the Union" with Samuel L. Jackson and Willem Dafoe and 2001's "Along Came a Spider" with Morgan Freeman.

Informed heterosexual comments
To: BurbankKarl
This is reason #9 while Hollywood is going down the tubes. You can't make up stuff like this. It's hard to escape
reality when reality is more bizarre than fiction.
So Hollywood is reduced to awarding best "documentary" to fiction, in order to provide the fantasy.

What award will the academy give him so they can thumb their noses at red state Americans?


To: glock rocks
I understand that his next film will be called "Buy Another Gay".



49 posted on 02/02/2006 7:52:53 PM PST by To: VOA
Are you kidding? In the Hollywood of "BokeBack Mounting" and TransAmerica, being arrested for hooking AND being a drag queen is a GREAT career booost.

I can see the headlines.

And next Year's Oscars goes to....It is my understanding Hollywood is full of whores, in front of and behind the cameras.


To: BurbankKarl
Thank you for not posting pictures


To: BurbankKarl
Mark Geragos? The guy will get life


To: BurbankKarl
This is so hilarious....


40 posted on 02/02/2006 7:10:36 PM PST by CalperniaTo: BurbankKarl
Hollywood's response: "Give that man an Oscar!"

To: Michael.SF.
Only if he waxed those caterpillars off his forehead!
To: BurbankKarl
Gee. I guess he would qualify as a pervert.

To: BurbankKarl
I bet his defense is he was researching for a movie.
He must have made one ugly drag queen:




To: BurbankKarl
Which is worse, getting arrested for prostitution, or everyone knowing you like to dress in women's clothing?



2 posted on 02/02/2006 6:01:13 PM PST by Casloy
To: RedMonqey
Indeed, he may have done it on purpose as a publicity stunt to re-start his career. He will now be cherished by countless Hollyweirdos as a brave pioneer deserving numerous film industry opportunities, awards, and accolades.



,,, maybe Lee and George Michael can do lunch sometime soon. When will the cops learn that this sort of thing is OK in Hollywood?
: shaggy eel
~~ a perfect pair!To: BurbankKarl
I can see how this guy would like to walk around in drag. He's spooky looking - that's for sure.

End of UPDATE.
iT REALLY DOES PAY TO KNOW ABOUT THE ISSUES YOU TALK ABOUT.

 

[AAP]

Respected independent studies from across the world confirm the male homosexual population to be just 1 to 2 %.No respected study has gone above 2%.This would seem to be consistent and accurate.The figure of 10% emanated from the homosexual community. snip from Paul Ministeries Fact: Homosexual leaders now admit that they knowingly exploited the inaccurate 10% myth in order to impose their lifestyle upon the American people. Tom Stoddard, a militant leader in the homosexual movement, told Newsweek in February 1993, "We used that figure when most gay people were entirely hidden to try to create an impression of our numerousness." If we were to assume the 10% figure to be correct then haemorrhoid cream would out strip global production at this time . Now call me old fashioned, but this had me pausing for thought ; The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) conducted
a study about homosexual sex practices and found the following:

42% report "fisting" where the hand or arm is inserted into the rectum of their partner.
29% report urinating on or in their partners.
17% report eating and/or rubbing themselves with the feces of their partners.(Pause for thought)
15% report sex with animals.(MAJOR PAUSE FOR THOUGHT, 15%)
12% report giving or receiving of enemas for sexual pleasure Now that's .....errrr, equally valid.what was that about,........ neck to foot plastic jump suits,face masks and surgical gloves.You couldn't make it up. As that great basketball philosopher ,Rodman once said, "homosexuals are the weirdest people in the world and i don't like being around them".

Either you have a direct link to this, or you are just talking out of your ass as usual.


Also, as far as homos being only 1% or 2% of the world... how do you explain the number of people flocking to see Brokeback.

Now, links please. This is only about the 8th time I have asked.

 

[AAP]

Any source of news that has "Traditional" or "Republic" in the organization name is going to immediately disregarded as biased and insecure.

But nice try, though still no links. I really want to see this CDC and fisting links.

 

[tanka]

censorship is a fagots best friend


You can't even spell. Just like your sissy ass "scientific website links".

 

[tanka]

You can find my reply under Matthew Mcconaughey another boring Born WHAT Way?
By Dr. Paul Cameron
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization.
ass faggot.Gay activists regularly claim that they were "born that way" and thus cannot change their desires or stop their activities. Yet there are numerous documented cases in which homosexuals have changed. The Masters-Johnson Institute reported that: "A 25-year-old man had had his first sexual experience when he was 13 years old. It was arranged by his lesbian mother with an older gay man. After that episode, his imagery and interpersonal sexual experience were exclusively homosexual.... The man was motivated to establish a heterosexual life style because he was sincerely distressed by public disapproval of homosexuality and his personal loneliness. [After treatment, he] has been followed for 3 1/2 years. His sexual interaction has been exclusively heterosexual. He has moved out of the gay community and has changed... his life style."(1)

Was this man's sexual orientation biologically deturmined?
If so, how was it initially set - toward heterosexuality or homosexuality?
And if it was set initially, how was he able to change?
The answers to these seemingly "esoteric" questions matter a great deal. For one thing, the political stakes are high. The March 3, 1993 New York Times/CBS News Poll reported that a majority of those who believe that gays "cannot change" favored permitting homosexuals to serve in the military. Only a third of those who believed it is a choice felt the same way.

Many opinions about gay rights hinge on the question of whether gays are "born that way" and/or "can't change." For instance, 57% of those who believe it is immutable consider homosexuality an acceptable life style vs 18% of those who consider it a choice. But if homosexual activity is no more inevitable or unchangeable than drunkenness or drug use, most people seem willing to insist that homosexuals abandon their destructive behavior.

Two prominent 'homosexual' psychiatrists, examining the evidence of their own lives as well as those of others, came to different conclusions in this long-running debate. The first of these, Sigmund Freud, saw his homosexual urges as pathological. Through self-analysis, he overcame them and eventually rejoiced in the "greater independence that results from having overcome my homosexuality."(2) The second of these, Richard Isay, confronted his desires, pronounced them "natural," divorced his wife and joined the gay subculture.(3)

In 1992 Isay admitted that the "conviction among most, though not all, dynamically oriented psychiatrists in general and psychoanalysts in particular [is] that homosexuality can and should be changed to heterosexuality."(4) Yet, while acknowledging this consensus among his colleagues, Isay called attempts to change homosexual desire "the greatest abuse of psychiatry in America today." Why? Because the "attempt to change is extremely harmful."(3) Instead, society should change to accommodate homosexuality.

Dr. Isay, who chairs the American Psychiatric Association's committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues, argues that homosexuality "is constitutional [that is, biological in origin]."(4) To support his position, he cited as proof two 1991 studies - the "gay brains" research of Simon LeVay(5) and the "gay twins" study of Bailey & Pillard.(6)

In 1993, Drs. William Byne and Bruce Parsons, researchers at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, critically reviewed "the evidence favoring a biologic theory" presented by LeVay and Bailey & Pillard.(7) They concluded in the Archives of General Psychiatry that "[t]here is no evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory" of sexual orientation!

How could these researchers dismiss as inadequate the very studies that were fundamental to Dr. Isay's argument - and that even conservative columnist William- F. Buckley referred to in 1993 as proving that homosexuals are 'born that way?'

Byne & Parsons remembered that from the 1940s through the 1970s it was widely argued and believed in the scientific community that male homosexuals had a deficiency of male hormones. However, only 3 "studies had indicated lower testosterone levels in male homosexuals, while 20 studies found no differences based on sexual orientation, and two reported elevated testosterone levels in male homosexuals." In spite of these other studies, textbooks alluded to the supposed "fact" of hormonal differences for three decades. But this "scientific" belief was false.

Gay Brains: Byne & Parsons observed that the LeVay study was based upon a supposed functional correlation between the SDN-POA brain center in male rats and a brain center called INAH3 in humans. LeVay reasoned that since the SDN-POA had an effect on male rat crouching/mounting behavior, then a corresponding difference in the same part of the brain would make men homosexual. He assumed that the INAH3 in men was essentially the same as the SDN-POA in rats. But, as it turns out, the "effective lesion site within the anterior hypothalamus for disrupting mounting behavior [in male rats] lies above, not within, the SDN-POA. Thus, the SDN-POA does not play a critical role in male-typical behavior in male rats, and the correlation between its size and mounting frequencies clearly does not reflect a causal relationship." LeVay compared human brains with rat brains but failed to locate the analogous region. Instead of the "bullseye" that Isay and the mass media celebrated, it was an embarrassing miss!

LeVay's study also had numerous technical problems. For instance, his samples included 19 brains of gays who died of AIDS and 16 brains from men whose sexual orientation was unknown. He assumed the 16 were heterosexual, even though 5 had died of AIDS. More importantly, although LeVay argued that a small INAH3 "caused" homosexuality, some of the gays had an INAH3 that was larger than the average size of the INAH3 of the "heterosexuals," and some of the "heterosexuals" had an INAH3 that was smaller than those of gays. So some of his gays "should" have been heterosexual and vice-versa.

Gay Twins: Bailey & Pillard reported that 52% of identical twins of homosexuals were also homosexual. But after the media finished hyping Bailey & Pillard's results, King & McDonald(8) published a new 'sexual orientation of twins' study, which found concordance rates for homosexuality of 25% in identical twins. That's half the 52% reported by Bailey & Pillard. Drs. Byne & Parsons noted the large proportions of identical twins in both studies "who were discordant for homosexuality despite sharing not only their genes but also their prenatal and familial environments... [which] underscores our ignorance of the factors that are involved, and the manner in which they interact, in the emergence of sexual orientation."

The evidence supporting the "born that way" claim of Isay and other gay activists is tenuous. It has been uncritically accepted and hyped by the media and some less-than-careful researchers. But it hasn't been replicated by others and is riddled with technical problems.

On the other side is a body of scientific evidence that suggests that homosexuality is adopted by people who are confused, sexually adventurous and/or rebellious. This evidence suggests that sexual orientation is flexible, not immutable. And the evidence comes from the largest studies on the subject, conducted by researchers on both sides of the gay rights debate.

Sexual Preference Shifts
That sexual desire and behavior are flexible was demonstrated by the Kinsey Institute in 1970. It reported(9) that 81% of 684 gays and 93% of 293 lesbians had changed or shifted either their sexual feelings or behaviors after age 12.58% of the gays and 77% of the lesbians reported a second shift in sexual orientation; 31% of the gays and 49% of the lesbians reported a third shift; and 13% of the gays and 30% of the lesbians reported even a fourth shift in sexual orientation before "settling" into adult homosexuality. The shifts reported by these subjects varied in degree, but some were quite dramatic - about a quarter of gays and a third of lesbians once had heterosexual desires and 5% of heterosexual men and 3% of heterosexual women once had substantial homosexual desires. Heterosexuals in the study were much less likely to report shifts in their orientation. Even so, 29% of 337 heterosexual men and 14% of 140 heterosexual women reported at least one shift; while 4% of the men and 1% of the women reported at least three shifts. Immutable things like eye color or skin color don't change once, much less three or four times!

Unlike biological changes, the shifts in sexual orientation began at age 18 or later for half of both gays and lesbians. Sexual changes, five or more years after puberty, are exceptionally late and without biological precedent in development. But changes in tastes (e.g., food or entertainment) often take place around age 18.

Other Evidence
The same Kinsey study also produced other evidence that can not be explained in terms of biological determinism, but would readily support the idea that choice is involved in sexual orientation and behavior:

74% of their gays admitted to having been sexually aroused by a female and 80% of lesbians said that they had been sexually aroused by a male;
19% of their gays and 38% of lesbians had been heterosexually married;
20% of gays, 5% of heterosexual men, 7% of lesbians and no heterosexual women had had sex with animals.
Consistent with these results, the Family Research Institute (FRI) 10 conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from 5 U.S. cities in 1983 and found:

82% of those currently lesbian and 66% of those currently gay said that they had been in love with someone of the opposite sex;
88% of lesbians and 73% of gays had been sexually aroused by someone of the opposite sex;
67% of lesbians and 54% of gays reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex;
85% of lesbians and 54% of gays, as adults, had sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex;
32% of gays and 47% of lesbians had been heterosexually married; and
17% of gays, 3% of heterosexual men, 10% of lesbians and 1% of heterosexual women reported sex with animals.
These are the kinds of sexual choices one would expect from the sexually adventurous or confused. Unless Dr. Isay and his supporters are willing to believe that people are "born" to fall in love, get married or to have sex with animals, some measure of choice, rather than biological inevitability, must have been involved.

The ability to change explains the FRI findings that:

Overall, 7.8% of women and 12% of men claimed to have been homosexually aroused at some point in their life. Yet 59% of the once homosexually aroused women and 51% of the once homosexually aroused men were currently heterosexual;
5.1% of the women and 9.4% of the men admitted to at least one homosexual partner. Of these, only 58% of the women and 61% of the men were currently gay;
4.1% of women and 5.8% of men reported that they had, at least once, been "in homosexual love." Yet only 66% of those who had fallen in love with a member of the same sex were currently gay; and
almost a third of those who admitted to homosexual relations in adulthood were now heterosexual.
People Can Change
Where is the "biological inevitability" or "immutability" in these findings? The evidence suggests that people can modify their sexual tastes. The FRI survey in Dallas,(11) similar to the Kinsey survey in San Francisco, found that 1% of heterosexual females and 3% of heterosexual males at one time considered themselves homosexual (i.e., were ex-gay when interviewed).

And a survey of 50 wives who had no homosexual experiences or interests up to age 30, but who participated in homosexual sex acts as part of "swinging" (where married people swap partners) reported that all of these women eventually considered themselves to be bisexual.(12)

These are among the findings that seriously challenge the claim that sexual orientation is predetermined before or after birth, or even that it is permanently fixed in adulthood.

What is at Stake?
If sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and encouraged. Along these lines, Dr. Christopher Hewitt's(13) analysis of the frequency of homosexuality in various societies is summarized in the Table: societies that accept homosexuality have more of it and those that disapprove of and punish it have considerably less of it



With the above in mind, consider our society's future in light of D. Minkowitz's December 29, 1992 editorial in the national gay magazine, The Advocate:
"I am increasingly impatient with the old chestnut that our movement for public acceptance has not increased and will not increase the number of gay men and lesbians in existence. `There are more of us than there used to be,` historian John D'Elmilio has written. Firmly believing this, I wanted to... argue the morality of teaching kids that gay is OK even if it means that some will join our ranks...."

Indeed. Youth are often attracted to excitement and rebellion. The gay movement is growing.

Minkowitz also argued that the 'born gay' claim is nothing more than a smokescreen: "most of the line about homosex[uality] being one's nature, not a choice, was articulated as a response to brutal repression.... 'We didn't choose this, so don't punish us for it!' One hundred years later, it's time for us to abandon this defensive posture and walk upright on the earth. Maybe you didn't choose to be gay - that's fine. But I did."

When Kinsey (14) asked 1700 homosexuals in the 1940s how they "got that way," only 9% claimed that they were "born gay." In 1970, a similar percentage was recorded for 979 gays in San Francisco.(9) But in 1983, after the gay rights movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins, 35% of a random sample of 147 gays(10) said that they were "born that way.

Perhaps those who commit adultery, molest children or practice homosexuality are "born with" unusual biological influences. But there is no hard evidence of this. In fact, it appears that participation in these activities, like drug abuse or any other chosen behavior, is a combination of will and opportunity. No matter how such desires come about, members of society are rightly expected to control their behavior and not endanger others.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References
1. Schwartz MF & Masters WH The Masters and Johnson treatment program for dissatisfied homosexual men. Amer J Psychiatry 1984:141;173-81.
2.1910 letter to Sandor Ferenczi.
3. Wall Street Journal 4/21/93 A6.
4. Homosexuality and psychiatry, Psychiatric News, Feb. 7,1992, p.3.
5. LeVay S A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Science 1991;253:1034-1037.
6.Bailey JM & Pillard RCA genetic study of mate sexual orientation. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991;48: 1089-1996.
7. Human sexual orientation: the biologic theories reappraised. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1993:50;228-239.
8. King M & McDonald E Homosexuals who are twins: a study of 46 probands. Brit J Psychiatry 1992,160:407-419.
9. Belt AP & Weinberg MS Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978. /& Hammersmith SK Sexual Preference: Statistical Appendix. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981.
10. Cameron P, Cameron K. & Proctor K Effect of homosexuality upon public health and social order. Psychol Rpts, 1989,61,1167-79.
11. Cameron P, Cameron K. & Proctor K. Homosexuals in the Armed Forces, Psychol Repts, 1988,62,211-219.
12. Dixon, JK. The commencement of bisexual activity in swinging married women overage thirty. J Sex Research, 1984,20,71-98.
13.1993, after Broude GJ & Greene SJ Cross cultural codes on twenty sexual attitudes and practices. Ethnology 1976;15;409-430.
14. Gebhard P & Johnson AB The Kinsey data Philadelphia: Saunders, 1979.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This educational pamphlet has been produced by Family Research Institute, Inc., Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman. A complete report is available for a donation of $25 in the U.S., $40 foreign, postage included. Other pamphlets in the series include:
What Causes Homosexual Desire and Can it be Changed?
Child Molestation and Homosexuality
Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do
Violence and Homosexuality
Born WHAT Way?
The Psychology of Homosexualy
Same sex marriage: til death do us part?

 

[AAP]

Another bullshit cut and paste.

Still no CDC link huh? Gosh, the only scientific research that is completely unbiased that you quoted and said was fact, but yet you can't post a link to that little report can you?

Have another bombing you sissy.