The Great Manipulation

The Great Manipulation

Did you ever wonder how the homosexual lifestyle went from disrepute to almost general acceptance in just the past ten years or so? I found this change inexplicable until I discovered two enlightening articles. One was written in 2004 by R. Albert Mohler, Jr., the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The other was written two years later by Rev. Val J. Peter, a Catholic priest and former head of Girls and Boys Town. Both men wrote about the incredible manipulation of the American people and how it came about.

Two people who can claim responsibility for this manipulation were Harvard social scientists, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. Their 1989 book, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, became the go-to manual for producing a veritable revolution in our society. With the help of a complicit media, homosexuality became for millions an acceptable alternative lifestyle. 

Phase One in this manipulation was desensitization. According to Kirk and Madsen, the key here was to flood the media with “gay related advertising, presented in the least offensive fashion possible.” The goal was to talk about the gay lifestyle so much that people would just get tired of hearing about it. Once the people reached that point of weariness, then, according to the authors,” your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.”

This tactic was seen when numerous television shows featured kind, compassionate homosexual characters who were never portrayed as villains. The media featured stories about selfless homosexuals doing volunteer work in the community. Popular priests were urged to come out of the closet to profess their homosexuality. Ministers were recruited who preached acceptance and wore rainbow-colored vestments. A movie like Brokeback Mountain was not only produced but reaped several academy awards. Teachers were urged to read books like Heather Has Two Mommies to their innocent charges, and hundreds, if not thousands, were quite willing to oblige.

The second phase of manipulation was called “jamming,” or simply the “scare phase.” The idea here was to convince people that opposing the homosexual lifestyle would lead to being despised by others. This was made easier by labeling those who rejected this lifestyle as homophobes or bigots. They were laughed at, ostracized, and accused of lacking compassion for a victimized minority. Scripture scholars were recruited to say the Bible was misinterpreted and never really condemned homosexual behavior, thus undercutting men of the cloth who taught otherwise. Conservative Christians were condemned as hateful and the kind of people who would have supported the Salem Witch Trials. The authors wrote that such religious should be presented as “hysterical backwoods preachers, drooling with hate to a degree that looks both comical and deranged.” They were also accused of being out of step with modern psychology and science. But there was more: Kirk and Madsen wrote, “The campaign should focus on religious opposing gay views: jam homo hatred by linking it to Nazi terror.”   

Phase three was conversion. The media praised clergymen who openly associated with known homosexuals. Building on the second phase, Scripture was severely attacked. Jewish laws found in the Old Testament were shown to be unjustifiably cruel. In Leviticus 9, for example, we find, “Anyone who curses his father and mother shall be put to death.” The message from the pro-homosexual apologists was, since no one believes that should happen today, then why should anything in the Scriptures be taken seriously? After all, the Bible was written thousands of years ago by old, ignorant men. They could not have known anything about an evolving understanding of how the human mind and body work.

In order for conversion to take place, Kirk and Madsen wrote the following:

The public should be persuaded that gays are “victims of circumstance,” that they no more choose their sexual orientation than their height . . . gays should be considered to be born gay, even though sexual orientation for most human beings seems to be the product of a complex interaction between innate dispositions and environmental factors during childhood and early adolescence. To suggest in public that homosexuality might be “chosen” is to open the can of worms labeled moral choice and sin and give the religious right intransigents a stick to beat us with.

Does any of this sound familiar? Unless you have been living on another planet for the last decade or so, you have seen all these tactics played out ad infinitum. If you have found yourself swallowing the propaganda, you should be angry, because you have been played. In the pantheon of great hoaxes, you can add this one to climate change and Russian collusion. 

Mr. Mohler ends his article with this summary:

The real tragedy of “After the Ball” . . . is the complete rejection of the very moral foundations which made this society possible. In order to address the most fundamental problems, we must understand the shape of the American mind. Looking back at “After the Ball,”. . . it all comes into frightening focus. 

For all who take their faith seriously, the homosexual agenda should, indeed, be frightening. If it’s not, that in itself is frightening.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Written by
Thomas Addis
  • By linking the promotion of homosexuality with the “hoax” of climate change and Russian election interference, Mr. Addis is engaging in the same behavior he condemns others of doing. Sad.