Overt Operation?
Some might argue that there’s nothing wrong with teaching kids about diversity, just as it’s only fair to include and encourage gays and lesbians in the workplace, where they can make a positive contribution. Though well meaning, that view misses the point entirely. The homosexual agenda has nothing to do with making a positive contribution. Furthermore, gay rights activists will never settle for a “live and let live” role. Their goal is to enforce acceptance and legitimization of their lifestyle and to overpower and overwhelm by sheer force anyone who dares to stand in their way.
This is not merely my opinion; it’s what homosexual activists have said about their own game plan. They have a strategic marketing plan to promote homosexuality and to vilify their enemies. That plan has been outlined and published in multiple places, including Guide magazine in November 1987, and it makes for some pretty eye-opening reading.
In “The Overhauling of Straight America,” homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill describe several strategies that homosexuals can use to push their way onto center stage. Among their directives: “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers. … Mr. and Mrs. Public must be given no extra excuses to say, ‘They are not like us.’ … Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, but should instead take antidiscrimination as its theme. … Make the victimizers look bad. … The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America. These images might include: the Ku Klux Klan demonstrating that gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; menacing pugs, thugs and convicts speaking coolly about the ‘fags’ they have killed or would like to kill; a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.”
There is nothing benign here, no reasonable disagreement, no respect for the opinions or moral reservations of those who have expressed concern for the dismantling of our culture. Rather, what’s being presented here is a plan for combat and the conquest of a nation.
Less than 2 percent of the population of the United States is actively homosexual, yet no other group exerts such enormous pressure or wields such power over the nation’s cultural institutions. Those forwarding the gay agenda know this. It’s been their stated goal since the 1970s, and they want to use that power to coerce the federal government, state legislatures and the courts at all levels into passing and prosecuting laws that give special rights to same-sex couples and others in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. While they preach tolerance, they are all for laws that punish those who oppose the homosexual agenda.
Between 1972 and 1978, at least 40 state legislatures granted “civil rights” to homosexuals comparable to those accorded to ethnic minorities. At least 20 states repealed their sodomy laws, and in 2003 the United States Supreme Court, in the case of Lawrence v. Texas, ruled the sodomy laws of Texas unconstitutional, forcing by implication all 50 states to take similar action.
When Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, it did so with the support of 68 percent of the American people. The vote in the House was an astonishing 342 to 67, and in the Senate it was an equally impressive 85 to 14. The bill was signed into law by then President Bill Clinton, but he did it in the middle of the night to make sure there was little or no opportunity for the press to report on this important story. That law recognized the traditional definition of marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. It also insured that no state would be forced to accept another state’s definition of marriage if it included either “civil unions” or “same-sex marriage.”
Subsequently, 43 states passed constitutional amendments and ordinances of various kinds to protect the institution of marriage from redefinition by the homosexual lobby. But since DOMA was signed into law, a long list of academics, activists and their lawyers have introduced legal challenges claiming the federal and state laws are unconstitutional. In 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and since then five other states have followed suit—not including those states (and cities) that recognize these marriages but don’t grant licenses for them.
Clearly, the battle for same-sex marriage has become the centerpiece of the gay agenda in recent years. Despite poll after poll revealing that the American people want to preserve the sanctity of marriage and safeguard the family, the “debate” over defining marriage takes center stage each voting season.
Homosexuals say they want the right to get married and live normal lives just like heterosexual couples, but this is a lie. On the surface, marriage seems like such a natural and innocent request. Who could argue with that? But that’s another part of the homosexuals’ campaign of deception. What they actually want is to force same-sex marriage on America as part of a much larger strategy for destroying the concept of marriage altogether.
If that sounds extreme, consider the words of homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile, who made this aspect of the agenda perfectly clear in Out magazine. In his article he urges his fellow homosexuals to “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely. … To debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution. … The most subversive action lesbians and gays can undertake—and one that would perhaps benefit all of society—is to transform the notion of ‘family’ altogether.”
There it is: The mission is not participation but subversion.
Faithwire News 
Larry Tomczak 
